You've seen the finalists, had the opportunity to play them and now it's time to vote to decide which map will walk away the winner of TLMC6. Not only are the maps competing for ladder consideration, but the top three maps will be awarded with cash prizes - including a $1000 first place prize - all provided by Blizzard. As with last season, at the conclusion of the voting period the public and pro vote will be combined and the winning maps determined.
Finalists
Below are the finalists for TLMC6. You can view them all conveniently in this imgur album. We strongly recommend using this because it allows you to view the maps in high resolution very easily. You can also find the maps uploaded to Battle.net by searching for the [TLMC] tag.
You can find some of the VODs from the TLMC Open on Basetrade.tv.
Bridgehead | Semmo
Dash and Terminal | SeinGalton
Ecosphere | Enekh
Moonlight Madness | SidianTheBard
Mutiny | Timetwister22
Noah's Ark | Superouman
Terraform | -NegativeZero-
Vote
Thank you for voting. Results will be announced soon.
I really like Noah's Ark art design (it's a huge ass spaceship), but voted for Terraform's gimmick.
Opinion on the maps :
- Bridgehead has an art direction that reminds me furiously of BW (Lost Temple, is that you?) Really interesting layout, I mean, I have no idea how I am going to defend so many open spots. I just want to put lurkers on the bridge - Dash and Terminal, this time, it's Scrap Station that comes to mind. Seems really easy to turtle on 3 bases - Echosphere : Rocks, rocks everywhere. I have the strong feeling that the author wants us to use the rocks to our advantage, but we will just end up doing nothing with them on 90% of the games.
Actually, I won't finish this analysis. I am not good enough. Terraform is visually pleasing, while I have no idea how the middle of Noah's Ark is made (everything greens means I have no idea if it's high or low ground). I am happy the maps have interesting layouts (read : woot! It's not Daybreak reskinned!), but I have little idea how they will play out. I could make a quick analysis on reaper access and potential blink allies, but honestly, what's the point?
Moonlight Madness is the most interesting of the backdoor maps (or rather, the least displeasing), and Mutiny is literally just like the previous map in the ladder pool "main attack path is narrow and on the low ground". But with a backdoor!
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed and is the reason Biome won.
I kinda agree I had 2 maps in mind. Some good maps may not get a high number of vote because it was everyone 2nd favorite.
I feel like links to the VODs (or even spoiler tagged embedded VODs) next to each map with timestamps going directly to that map's games would be pretty appropriate.
Most people will be too lazy to go find the games if you don't do something like this, whereas if it's right there people might actually do some due diligence before voting. (you know, so they aren't just voting based on silly stuff like which mapmaker made it, or their general feel off the overview)
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Everyone ranking the maps from favourite to least favourite. Then using the mean rating of the maps to determine the winner. While this system also has its flaws, it's reasonably simple, and a huge step up from the current one.
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Everyone ranking the maps from favourite to least favourite. Then using the mean rating of the maps to determine the winner. While this system also has its flaws, it's reasonably simple, and a huge step up from the current one.
Instead of unelected judges making a short list of maps for the community to vote on, I would prefer to have judges who are elected by the community make the decision themselves. They would then be obligated to report back to the community with their process/thoughts in order to ensure reelection, etc. The Republic way.
But of course this is TL's competition and they can do with it what they want. And Blizzard provided the $2000 prize pool, which they seem to have strong-armed the resulting finalists with. Can only complain so much.
Yeah Single Transferable Vote like systems would work too. Though no system is perfect (which is interestingly provable) most systems are better than this one. Too bad electoral systems are often similar to this one :/.
I kinda feel like mech will be a hard to engage and possibly boring/ugly to watch play out, but still fun in a high concept way that is more exciting in BW on heartbreak ridge.
BTW on top of ignoring the maps' makers, I also urge everyone to spend plenty of time analyzing the maps and not vote for a map just because it looks good.
Yeah, this + watching the VODs. My order changed quite a bit after seeing the maps in action.
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Everyone ranking the maps from favourite to least favourite. Then using the mean rating of the maps to determine the winner. While this system also has its flaws, it's reasonably simple, and a huge step up from the current one.
Instead of unelected judges making a short list of maps for the community to vote on, I would prefer to have judges who are elected by the community make the decision themselves. They would then be obligated to report back to the community with their process/thoughts in order to ensure reelection, etc. The Republic way.
But of course this is TL's competition and they can do with it what they want. And Blizzard provided the $2000 prize pool, which they seem to have strong-armed the resulting finalists with. Can only complain so much.
I support any system where it forces the TL admins to do complex math.
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Everyone ranking the maps from favourite to least favourite. Then using the mean rating of the maps to determine the winner. While this system also has its flaws, it's reasonably simple, and a huge step up from the current one.
Instead of unelected judges making a short list of maps for the community to vote on, I would prefer to have judges who are elected by the community make the decision themselves. They would then be obligated to report back to the community with their process/thoughts in order to ensure reelection, etc. The Republic way.
But of course this is TL's competition and they can do with it what they want. And Blizzard provided the $2000 prize pool, which they seem to have strong-armed the resulting finalists with. Can only complain so much.
I support any system where it forces the TL admins to do complex math.
Ehhhhhhh I don't think that's necessary. I think if you lock R1CH for a couple days in a cell with water and some bananas he could find a way to automatize the whole thing out of sheer boredom.
While I appreciate that people would prefer a different kind of vote, at present this is the only vote system supported on TL at the moment. Regardless, this is how it will be this season! Too far into the voting to change anything.
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
I believe even a simple option like having three polls giving 3-2-1 points would change the quality of voting drastically. We don't choose the one map that goes to the ladder so there is no need to limit choices and it's laconic enough to make every choice meaningful and thought-out (as opposed to rating every map on the scale of 1 to 10 for example). That way overall better maps would be rated higher because different people love different gimmicks but the idea of a good map is more or less the same.
This of course can have side effects, i.e. Bridgehead winning just because "BW looks" make everyone put it in top 3 (mind you, I think it deserves to be in top 3 whatever the tileset), but no system is perfect.
I actually do it in my head anyway before voting because it makes me assign values to different things I like in maps and compare them instead of just choosing one based on general impression.
PS Is there any chance Ganymede will make it to the ladder?
On May 12 2015 17:48 Plexa wrote: While I appreciate that people would prefer a different kind of vote, at present this is the only vote system supported on TL at the moment. Regardless, this is how it will be this season! Too far into the voting to change anything.
for future contests you could set up a google doc with 7 separate mandatory poll options, each on a scale of 1-10 (to ensure that everyone votes evenly across all maps, without skipping any).
On May 12 2015 12:36 covetousrat wrote: Totally not voting for those backdoor rock maps. Theyre so terrible. Terraform is really interesting.
I agree 100%. Why backdoors to your main? Expedition Lost has just been proving everyone that this is broken... They still look pretty and good job to everyone!
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Something like the voting system we used for map contests back in the day at broodwarmaps.net would be great, where you could give 5, 3 and 1 (I think) points respectively to up to 3 different maps.
Where is the "All suck" option? They're all pretty retarded tbh. The current map pool showed us what backrocks in your main and gold bases are good for. Stupid games and even more stupid all ins.
On May 12 2015 22:32 Obsi wrote: Where is the "All suck" option? They're all pretty retarded tbh. The current map pool showed us what backrocks in your main and gold bases are good for. Stupid games and even more stupid all ins.
Hardcounter units and FF are the main reasons why all maps since 2011 are pretty similar. The biggest difference begins the position at 4th base but however most are the same again. I feel bad for mapmakers and blizzard did a very horrible job around this.
Great example is Cloud Kingdom and Daybreak, first 3 bases are on the most boring places, the 4th are on most interesting places. Another thing is the biggest stalement begins shortly before you take the 4th base (on all maps), thats why many ppl think the position of 4th base isnt important because the stalement is superior (less superior on Cloud kingdom and Daybreak).
On May 12 2015 13:30 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I'll say it again; I hate the fact that we only vote for the map we think is best. This voting system is flawed...
I'm inclined to agree.
What would you suggest as an alternative?
Something like the voting system we used for map contests back in the day at broodwarmaps.net would be great, where you could give 5, 3 and 1 (I think) points respectively to up to 3 different maps.
ok all in all, I voted Ecosphere. I think it has the most standard base layout out of all bases and it plays out very fun, not forcing people into either strategies.
i just noticed the random vespene geysers at the center area of the map of ecosphere . lol whats the point did the desinger think they will ever be taken? if you are so much ahead that you can mine from there, then you can just finish enemy trough the trillion entrances their base has
After playing a few games on these maps i have to say that i don't like any them of very much. Ecosphere seems to be most tolerable map even though it's full of rocks. Bridgehead seems to be good for zerg which might not be the worst considering the recent nerf to swarmhost. I can not understand why Noah's Ark would ever make it into the voting, the 3rd and 4th base are so easily defendable and the narrow path in the middle is easily abusable against zerg.
so many cool ideas, but from going over the maps briefly and imagining high level games on them, only Noah's Ark and Terraform seem playable.
Noah's Ark is probably the better map of both, but Terraform is a bit more innovative, so it gets my vote. expansions / defending them is very awkward or even impossible on some maps unfortionally - allins way too strong
For a possible different voting system, I strongly recommend the condorcet method. It is a preferential voting system that is relatively easy to understand. Each voter ranks the maps in order of best to worst, and every single bit of information is considered in the final outcome. Read the wikipedia article for a good explanation:
On May 12 2015 23:48 NasusAndDraven wrote: i just noticed the random vespene geysers at the center area of the map of ecosphere . lol whats the point did the desinger think they will ever be taken? if you are so much ahead that you can mine from there, then you can just finish enemy trough the trillion entrances their base has
These are not "random geysers" there are two gold mineral lines in the middle of the map but blocked with debris.
Holy moley enough with the backdoor rocks in main bases! It's extremely imbalanced and not fun at all when trying to defend stupid gimmick strategies. Has expedition lost taught us nothing????
On May 13 2015 06:07 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Why are there rocks on nearly every map...wtf
According to my calculations... Bridgehead has 8 Dash & Terminal has 6 + 1 tower Ecosphere has 18 + 12 towers Moonlight Madness has 4 + 2 towers Mutiny has 6 + 4 towers Noah's ark has 0 Terraform has 0 + 2 towers
On May 13 2015 06:07 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Why are there rocks on nearly every map...wtf
According to my calculations... Bridgehead has 8 Dash & Terminal has 6 + 1 tower Ecosphere has 18 + 12 towers Moonlight Madness has 4 + 2 towers Mutiny has 6 + 4 towers Noah's ark has 0 Terraform has 0
On May 13 2015 06:07 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Why are there rocks on nearly every map...wtf
According to my calculations... Bridgehead has 8 Dash & Terminal has 6 + 1 tower Ecosphere has 18 + 12 towers Moonlight Madness has 4 + 2 towers Mutiny has 6 + 4 towers Noah's ark has 0 Terraform has 0
terraform has 2 collapsible towers covering the narrow chokes in the most direct pathway across the map. therefore noah's ark must be the superior map, gg superouman.
edit: i think ecosphere must have been directly chosen by dustin browder to be a finalist
I was told by Rifkin to come here over reddit and vote for the map I wanna play next season.
I don't wanna play on any map because they are all terrible in one way or another, most of them don't have a 4th base for Zerg and many of them have horrible-to-take 3rd bases.
I'm reallly disappointed in this TLMC tbh.
Oh yeah, and backdoors suck, and considering 4 of 7 have them... yeah no.
On May 13 2015 03:59 Supersamu wrote: For a possible different voting system, I strongly recommend the condorcet method. It is a preferential voting system that is relatively easy to understand. Each voter ranks the maps in order of best to worst, and every single bit of information is considered in the final outcome. Read the wikipedia article for a good explanation:
Any method of breaking ties is okay, and will still provide a better and more fair result than the current one.
Agreed. While it does provide a more equitable result between two maps of comparable quality, the true strength of a vote like this is that it will almost always prevent a map from winning by just being different, since it puts a much stronger lens on quality. Think back to TLMC4, and how Biome won, by virtue of being nothing but a 5-player map with unusual aesthetics. Since all the other maps were so similar relatively speaking, people naturally voted for the one that stands out, and the result was a map won 1st place, yet was completely unsuitable for ladder. Ranking the maps tends to weed this out, since the stronger maps will get a fair shake either way.
I'm all for pushing the boundaries with map making so I'm personally very pleased with the map selection. The down side is of course the reduced likelihood that blizzard will pick the map up but... well... what can you do?
Also want to add my voice to the call for slightly more subtle voting. There was a referendum on Alternative Vote in the UK a while back and it was much better, perhaps not best but better.
Everyone ranks em 1 - x
Count up all the no 1 votes
Last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their number 2 option become their number 1 option.
New last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their next highest option become their number 1 option.
I voted Noah's Ark, I think it's good in every way, even the aesthetics are so beautiful, though I might be a bit protoss biased. The other interesting maps for me were Terraform and Dash and Terminal.
I think Terraform even though it's pretty unique compared to other maps we have, it still feels the map will play out in a standard way, similar to maps like overgrowth. Of course that can be a good thing, since that means it can be a balanced map but still it doesn't bring enough innovation for it to be 1st place in my opinion.
The other map Dash and Terminal could bring a unique style of plays, similar to how habitation station worked out, there's actually similarity both those maps with the golds and close by air mains but Dash and Terminal also brings out the isle expansion, and with all this it can create new strategies specifically for this map. However it's too gimmicky to be the winner.
The rest of the maps weren't that good, maybe Bridgehead but only cause it makes me nostalgic about broodwar.
I like Dash and Terminal's take on layout, but the map tile set is a little to shiny. I like all of the maps though for at least pushing out some boundaries.
On May 13 2015 09:18 -NegativeZero- wrote: PSA: Terraform is actually a bad map. If you were thinking of voting for it, please consider Noah's Ark instead.
The casting for the tournament was really sub-par making the VODs hard to watch - making the voting more difficult. A lot of slip ups like saying the word Terran, but talking about Zerg... saying Broodlords won't work on the map against mech, but failing to say why other than pointing out that the Terran has a lot of Vikings... Constantly talking about supply blocks or supply counts... I guess this is all standard fair and maybe I'm just jaded, I don't know. Also seeing Revolution 30 supply below a Terran at the 10 minute mark with 1000 minerals in the bank made me believe these games were not high level. I vote for Bridgehead.
I think Ecosphere, Mutiny, and Terraform are IMO, the best maps. All have relatively defensible thirds, and easily walled off naturals, yet there are plenty of routes to attack at different locations. Zerg might have some trouble on Terraform because of the terrain, but it won't be as bad as many of the other maps. Ecosphere's 3rd/4th locations are both relatively easy to secure, but neither is so easy to defend that it is unreasonable.
Noah's Ark will likely be heavily Terran Favored-> The bases are all vulnerable to drops, but easily walled off from ground attacks, and straight attacks through the center aren't going to work, so bio play where the army can pick up in medivacs to get across the map quickly while ignoring the unfavorable terran will be a huge benefit. It's a bad Zerg map for anything other than Mutas.
Terminal: Can't reasonably wall the natural, so Zerg will likely dominate the map in ZvP, just like in every other map where this was the case.
Bridgehead: The third will likely be too hard to hold for Protoss/Terran Otherwise the map would be alright.
Moonlight madness I'm not sure on, but having to watch 2 sets of relatively far away rocks to protect a backdoor, will be annoying.
On May 13 2015 08:38 Dapper_Cad wrote: I'm all for pushing the boundaries with map making so I'm personally very pleased with the map selection. The down side is of course the reduced likelihood that blizzard will pick the map up but... well... what can you do?
Also want to add my voice to the call for slightly more subtle voting. There was a referendum on Alternative Vote in the UK a while back and it was much better, perhaps not best but better.
Everyone ranks em 1 - x
Count up all the no 1 votes
Last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their number 2 option become their number 1 option.
New last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their next highest option become their number 1 option.
Repeat until one map has over 50% of the vote.
Coming from a country with MMP (shoutouts to Germany for being the only other country that I know of with this system) and one which has held 2 referenda on the topic in my lifetime I'm well versed in alternate vote systems. The reality is that all voting systems have drawbacks and advantages, there is rarely an objective best system. Alternate vote systems (stv etc) often favour the least hated map rather than the map that appeals to most people. That isn't always the map that the contest is looking for.
While the current system favours "different" maps we endeavor to choose maps which are distinct from each other to minimise this effect (unlike politics where identity is chosen strategically to gain the most vote withing the electoral system). Funnily enough, last season we were concerned echo/coda were too similar and yet they finished 1st/3rd last season!
There is also the progamer vote to offset any serious distortions in the public vote (ie we have a correction mechanism if the public gets things horribly wrong). Finally, while this will determine the cash prizes, Blizzard ultimately will choose the map(s) they like for use - and let's not forget that biome wasn't on ladder.
On May 13 2015 07:51 SoulmaN__ wrote: I was told by Rifkin to come here over reddit and vote for the map I wanna play next season.
I don't wanna play on any map because they are all terrible in one way or another, most of them don't have a 4th base for Zerg and many of them have horrible-to-take 3rd bases.
I'm reallly disappointed in this TLMC tbh.
Oh yeah, and backdoors suck, and considering 4 of 7 have them... yeah no.
I'm actually having quite some reservations about Ark even though "I like it the best". The CS is going to get old quick. The chokepoints kind of make up for this in terms of positional play but games that go to 5th base are going to have problems with push distance and lack of options. Going YOLO for Bridgehead is so tempting.
Tune in next post as the drama of WHAT WILL PATH VOTE FOR!?!? continues
On May 13 2015 15:45 EatThePath wrote: I'm actually having quite some reservations about Ark even though "I like it the best". The CS is going to get old quick. The chokepoints kind of make up for this in terms of positional play but games that go to 5th base are going to have problems with push distance and lack of options. Going YOLO for Bridgehead is so tempting.
Tune in next post as the drama of WHAT WILL PATH VOTE FOR!?!? continues
I'm in the same bote, I haven't used my vote yet because I'm not sure what map I'll go for.
On May 13 2015 08:38 Dapper_Cad wrote: I'm all for pushing the boundaries with map making so I'm personally very pleased with the map selection. The down side is of course the reduced likelihood that blizzard will pick the map up but... well... what can you do?
Also want to add my voice to the call for slightly more subtle voting. There was a referendum on Alternative Vote in the UK a while back and it was much better, perhaps not best but better.
Everyone ranks em 1 - x
Count up all the no 1 votes
Last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their number 2 option become their number 1 option.
New last place gets removed and all those that voted for it have their next highest option become their number 1 option.
Repeat until one map has over 50% of the vote.
Coming from a country with MMP (shoutouts to Germany for being the only other country that I know of with this system) and one which has held 2 referenda on the topic in my lifetime I'm well versed in alternate vote systems. The reality is that all voting systems have drawbacks and advantages, there is rarely an objective best system. Alternate vote systems (stv etc) often favour the least hated map rather than the map that appeals to most people. That isn't always the map that the contest is looking for.
While the current system favours "different" maps we endeavor to choose maps which are distinct from each other to minimise this effect (unlike politics where identity is chosen strategically to gain the most vote withing the electoral system). Funnily enough, last season we were concerned echo/coda were too similar and yet they finished 1st/3rd last season!
There is also the progamer vote to offset any serious distortions in the public vote (ie we have a correction mechanism if the public gets things horribly wrong). Finally, while this will determine the cash prizes, Blizzard ultimately will choose the map(s) they like for use - and let's not forget that biome wasn't on ladder.
That probably came across as condescending. The political conversation in the UK is bizarrely simplistic: All sectors of the press panned AV as "too complex" for the dribbling herd, that plus the fact that our current electoral system is based on how fast a horse can run means I've a bit of a chip on my shoulder about this stuff. Sorry.
On May 13 2015 15:45 EatThePath wrote: I'm actually having quite some reservations about Ark even though "I like it the best". The CS is going to get old quick. The chokepoints kind of make up for this in terms of positional play but games that go to 5th base are going to have problems with push distance and lack of options. Going YOLO for Bridgehead is so tempting.
Tune in next post as the drama of WHAT WILL PATH VOTE FOR!?!? continues
By CS you mean circle syndrome? Circle syndrome is about always expanding in the same direction right? On noah's ark, there will be several scenarios. you can expand equally to both directions or expand towards open expands or towards closed expands. You will do it to suit your playstyle. ZvTP : zerg will prefer open expands. terran and protoss will prefer closed expands. That means both players will expands in the opposite halves. TvP : terran will prefer open expands because forcefields. protoss will prefer closed expands. i think all mirror matchups will tend to go towards closed expands.
That said, players could also expand to both sides because it stretches them less.
So in the end, the circle syndrome is an illusion because the map has an axis symetry and not a rotation symetry.
On May 13 2015 21:29 IeZaeL wrote: Thats how tlmc works though , the most standard map always win.
And then people complain that there are only standard maps on the ladder.
On May 13 2015 22:47 Barrin wrote: I came up with a definition for Circle Syndrome the other week.
Circle Syndrome - The tendency for a map to encourage base trade scenarios.
Maps with high circle syndrome have a high tendency to encourage base trade scenarios and vice versa. All factors are to be considered.
If it weren't for the very tight chokes on the southeast bases, Noah's Ark would have unforgivably high Circle Syndrome.
edit: The CS on Noah's Ark is well within acceptable limits, but that's mostly due to how the southeast bases are nigh unassailable (super tight single choke& not much surrounding air space) for zerg in ZvT and ZvP and I guess terran in TvP (not sure) and in mirror matches.
On May 13 2015 14:36 Barrin wrote: Do we have any Zerg players pushing for Noah's Ark? :>
I was worried that zerg would be too strong because the 3rd is a bit far away. I moved them closer since.
I think the tighter the choke the farther they can be without giving zerg the advantage. Those chokes are very tight.
That means we dont have the same definition for the same words. But i see your point. Do i win a point for making an axis symetry map with circle syndrome? :D
My biggest fear about the 3rds is that it would be too hard to setup a base there because of the distance. But once you get the base up and running, it's fine.
Plus the very short distance by air for mutas and very long distance by ground. But it seems to be okay once you are prepared with turrets.
I enlarged the ridges compared to previous versions.
Plus the very short distance by air for mutas and very long distance by ground. But it seems to be okay once you are prepared with turrets.
Long distance thirds by ground but short by flight means P can easily die to muta (bigger problem for P than T, by the way, since turrets + repair is good, while cannons are meh and overcharge can be baited), but looks like you can blink somewhat decently from the third into the main so shouldn't be too bad.
That means we dont have the same definition for the same words.
I am the person who coined the term Circle Syndrome btw. I never gave it a definition until that one, and that's always what I meant by it. Words can change, but I'm pretty sure other mapmakers have already caught on to this [first] definition.
My biggest fear about the 3rds is that it would be too hard to setup a base there because of the distance. But once you get the base up and running, it's fine.
Exactly. I don't think this is bad necessarily, it just means you can't rush for it too fast. But once you've made a bit of an army it's basically yours (and once you've got a big army the 4th is basically yours too). Thinking protoss, or terran in tvz, here.
I see how players have good options during 3-4 base stage but nothing is stopping PTvZ from expanding towards enemy at any point, especially after that. I know 5+ bases is a long game but I don't like that Z has no way to avoid the issue, which necessarily crimps their ability to play a passive macro style, in turn truncating the whole tree of strategies for them and tilting the options basket in favor of the opponent. And it can set in before that if PT wants it to. e.g. Protoss can very well expand up when zerg does, the openess and distance of that base is comparable to Overgrowth where it happens all the time, and in fact there is less backstab potential because of the single-ramp leading to the nat platform. And then the push distance is very short and they have great chokepoints to work with (which can represent very big liability to zerg at various timings).
I don't think the map is particularly broken, I still like it, I just fear it's kind of "played out" already.
Moonlight Madness is one of the most aesthetically pleasing and interesting maps I've seen in a while, better than most of the other factory copy maps I see pumped out of TL usually.
On May 13 2015 22:47 Barrin wrote: I came up with a definition for Circle Syndrome the other week.
Circle Syndrome - The tendency for a map to encourage base trade scenarios.
First off i want to tell you that i am a big fan. Especially your post on FRB and circle syndrome are pretty much my thoughts worded much better than i ever could.
But come on man, dont define a term by one of its effects, but instead by its causes. Like "distance of opposing players expansions increase as they go on" or something.
On May 14 2015 02:42 EatThePath wrote: I see how players have good options during 3-4 base stage but nothing is stopping PTvZ from expanding towards enemy at any point, especially after that. I know 5+ bases is a long game but I don't like that Z has no way to avoid the issue, which necessarily crimps their ability to play a passive macro style, in turn truncating the whole tree of strategies for them and tilting the options basket in favor of the opponent.
Bases being near each other is not a zerg disadvantage at late game. If you have not noticed yet, then ill tell you that lategame zerg army is not very mobile.
On May 14 2015 02:42 EatThePath wrote: I see how players have good options during 3-4 base stage but nothing is stopping PTvZ from expanding towards enemy at any point, especially after that. I know 5+ bases is a long game but I don't like that Z has no way to avoid the issue, which necessarily crimps their ability to play a passive macro style, in turn truncating the whole tree of strategies for them and tilting the options basket in favor of the opponent.
Bases being near each other is not a zerg disadvantage at late game. If you have not noticed yet, then ill tell you that lategame zerg army is not very mobile.
Are we talking HotS still? Cause that's only BLs, which is more of a tech switch thing.
kinda disappointed with this tlmc in terms of layouts =/ looks are super good as always, but ganymede is better than all of those maps and should have won the last one imo..
One problem is the maps you listed as having a chance are (almost certainly) bad for Zerg. Z winrates are slightly down lately as it is, so the timing of this is unfortunate. Bridgehead isn't so bad on Zerg at least so yay for that.
As you were saying I agree that noah's might technically hold a decent winrate for Z but it would probably be through people always going muta and/or fast broodlords, which would get old quickly. Maybe we'll see though
@ what the pros said to the maps on remax et al, I can't take them seriously too often on the subject (a few do their homework, but generally.. no) as the only maps they've played on are the super super standard ladder/tourney stuff we've seen through the years. Anything remotely strange and they freak out without actually trying to understand the map. Probably the "weirdest" map they've played lately (barring the stuff in shoutcraft which a handful of pros have played) is inferno pools.. lol.
The best part about this is all the "pros" bitched when Desrow wanted to talk about TLMC6 maps. It just goes to show that a lot of pro gamers don't really give a shit about maps and just hope blizzard puts in good enough maps. Then the best part is when those maps that blizzard puts in are imbalanced, then the pros start to bitch.
Well then, how about instead of Huk and Naniwa just bitching about gold bases and saying they are out, they help us map makers out with better feedback so we can actually create some more balanced maps. But fuck it, who cares about maps, they need to stream and joke and fuck around to make $$$$$.
It's depressing...it really is...when the progamers don't give a shit about maps when that's the one thing players can do that balances the game.
My opinion 1. Terraform 2. Dash and Terminal 3. Noahs Ark 4. Mutiny 5. Bridgehead 6. Ecosphere 7. Moonlight Madness
My prediction on community votes 1. Terraform 2. Bridgehead 3. Noahs Ark 4. Dash And Terminal 5. Ecosphere Tied with 0 votes. Mutiny and Moonlight madness.
I really think Bridgehead will bring out a lot more interesting game play in pro-leagues rather than a ladder map. That being said I think Terraform is more of a ladder map than a pro-league map.
I'm a scrub (and a mapmaker) so I tend to think of maps more in terms of concept than balance. Because of this I put Noah's Ark at #1, just because we've never seen a map with this many narrow chokes in competitive SC2 and I've always wanted to know how it would play out, notably whether Z can adapt to it.
My preferences in order: 1. Noah's Ark 2. Moonlight Madness 3. Dash and Terminal 4. Bridgehead 5. Terraform/Mutiny 7. Ecosphere
On May 16 2015 17:16 -NegativeZero- wrote: Because of this I put Noah's Ark at #1, just because we've never seen a map with this many narrow chokes in competitive SC2 and I've always wanted to know how it would play out, notably whether Z can adapt to it.
You have seen nothing yet. I was working on this a few years ago. + Show Spoiler +
ignore the No Forcefield thing. I was simply experimenting with burrowed, invisible, invinsible 1x1 ultralisks to prevent some forcefield bullshit.
On May 16 2015 17:16 -NegativeZero- wrote: Because of this I put Noah's Ark at #1, just because we've never seen a map with this many narrow chokes in competitive SC2 and I've always wanted to know how it would play out, notably whether Z can adapt to it.
You have seen nothing yet. I was working on this a few years ago. + Show Spoiler +
oh I'm very familiar with your crazy concepts, I downloaded the map folder you made public. If anything I'm desperately hoping they become viable in LotV once Z finally has a decent forcefield-killer and choke abusing units. I've also been wanting to make stuff like that for a long time now.
I think D&T is the one map that could eventually be both, innovative and somewhat balanced. Though I would give it a higher chance if it didnt have the rocks AND the Gold bases AND the siegable natural on top of its interesting gimmick. Really hoping Terraform wins, Barrin basically explained why. Bridgeheads backdoor looks too wide and I dislike the fact that you have a highground to defend behind your third the way you stretch out vertically already. Noah's Arc is the kind of map I'd instaveto. I don't care if by some miracle it turns out balanced, I know that anytime a protoss spawns there on the ladder it's going to be a soultrain or some other brainless BO-shit that lacks any strategical interaction beween players and is basically a waste of time to play as zerg.
I kind of feel that way about all of them. They are all maps worthy of some consideration but none of them give me the "omg dis map so guuuuuud!" feels like a few maps that were submitted but didn't make it.
On May 18 2015 16:23 Fatam wrote: I kind of feel that way about all of them. They are all maps worthy of some consideration but none of them give me the "omg dis map so guuuuuud!" feels like a few maps that were submitted but didn't make it.
that seems to be the general theme of TLMC finalists... probably due to the focus on getting maps to ladder, and the judging team's consequent emphasis on balance as opposed to pure concept/execution.
however i do think there are some very interesting layouts this time, especially noah's ark which is the one real exception to the "balance > concept" guideline, and moonlight madness which has a very unique expansion pattern.
EPT
. Really excited to play some games on these
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0xi06Z4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cj1qGxZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zuIoR8U.jpg)
