On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
Given Blizzard's record (remember they changed Foxtrot Labs to only diagonal spawns), I seriously doubt they want asymmetrical maps. Also, they probably want all their maps to be playable for all races/matchups.
To be fair, the diagonal only was an emergency reaction to a totally imba map, I don't think that the kind of "asymetrical" stuff ProMeTheus112 has in mind...
Well blizzard said the current map poo turned out "much better than expected" so that's not really reassuring.
that's the joke
:/
I thought Blizzard was the joke
the joke is that community mapmakers spend years making maps expecting to one day receive a bunch of recognition and money from blizzard for some unknowable reason
it reminds me of people who are always trying to do you favors you don't need so they can ask you for something in return. hey, i mowed your lawn, give me $20!
Pretty sure every mapmaker starts making maps solely because it's "fun"/rewarding, it's another way to see the game ; no one originally expected a bunch of recognition and money from Blizz. Mapmakers just want their maps to be played on, and Blizz's shitty ladder system and WCS rules, in addition to the terrible lobbying of lazy foreign pro players who only want to play on ladder maps because they are unable to train any other way than by grinding the ladder, is preventing that.
On January 29 2016 20:36 Gwavajuice wrote: Maybe it'll be the occasion to have a new generation of mapmakers... Because the "I'm a genius, but blizzard refuses to let me shine" and "we used to make maps that way in BW" stuff is getting a bit old.
I also hope the korean mapmakers will be involved in some way.
And last, I hope that, instead of always theorizing balance and what the game shouldbe in their opinion, mapmakers will focus on the fun aspect of the game, and make maps the average players will be simply happy to get on ladder. Silliness is not that bad when done well.
First quality of a mapmaker should to love and play the game (problem being when you love and play the game you don't have much time to make maps)
What do you mean by "fun aspects of the game" though? Make a "standard", "unfun" map, and people complain that it's the same Daybreak shit. Make a make with "fun" shit and people complain that they can't make their one build order over and over again exactly like on other maps, and blame the map when they lose. In other words, how do you find fun aspects in a game most people play not because it is fun?
You mean people don't play it because it is fun, and they don't like fun, or do you think fun is not something the average player is looking in sc2?
If you go for the later, I dare to disagree, but maybe it's because we don't have the same definition of fun. Let's agree on another word then : "enjoy". You surely agree that people wouldn't play a game they don't enjoy, don't you?
My thesis is that an important amount of SC2 players play SC2 because it's an habit for them to play the game, not because they enjoy it. Hence the lack of fun.
Well blizzard said the current map poo turned out "much better than expected" so that's not really reassuring.
that's the joke
:/
I thought Blizzard was the joke
the joke is that community mapmakers spend years making maps expecting to one day receive a bunch of recognition and money from blizzard for some unknowable reason
it reminds me of people who are always trying to do you favors you don't need so they can ask you for something in return. hey, i mowed your lawn, give me $20!
Thank you for speaking on my behalf, because I can't speak for myself as a mapmaker. Also, wide-sweeping generalizations loaded with prejudice are always a great way to go!
On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
Rotationally symmetric 4p maps are also 2p asymmetric maps when played in close spawns.
Also mapmakers cannot easily control what race spawns in what side of the map, and if we do that via triggers then the map is not melee.
On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
I brought this idea up a couple of years ago. Have 4 maps that are totally standard for all races, then 3 maps specifically for PvZ, 3 maps for TvZ, 3 maps for TvP. In case of mirror, just replay the standard maps if necessary (bo7).
The idea got a lukewarm reception because people thought it would be too much work for pros to learn all the maps. I disagreed. Just make seasons longer if necessary.
On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
Given Blizzard's record (remember they changed Foxtrot Labs to only diagonal spawns), I seriously doubt they want asymmetrical maps. Also, they probably want all their maps to be playable for all races/matchups.
On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
Given Blizzard's record (remember they changed Foxtrot Labs to only diagonal spawns), I seriously doubt they want asymmetrical maps. Also, they probably want all their maps to be playable for all races/matchups.
On January 29 2016 22:40 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I want to throw this odd idea that was in my head, it wouldn't stand a chance to get selected on a blizz map collection thing for ladder, but what do you think of the idea of making assymetrical maps ?
In my mind I'm thinking, there could be maps that have no symmetry that are intended to be played in a specific match up, with separate starting locations for each race of the match up.
I think this could make an interesting set up for allowing some styles of play to appear. Races are assymetrical in Starcraft, so why never maps ?
Of course these downsides come with such map design : - likely playable only in 1 match up (?) - you have to collect knowledge of map only for that match up which may be tedious? tends to multiply the number of maps to know about - might tend to generate redundant strategies that are very effective on this specific map to be repeated
but there may be upsides... you can create conditions that make anything a race has become more effective or really free the creativity in terms of any strategic or tactical features that would otherwise create an imbalance if the map was supposed to be played in all match ups. You can always balance any weird feature that could possibly be the cause of an imbalance with a correct answer somewhere else on the map. You can change the weight of about anything in the game, units, timings for expos, etc, as long as you correctly place weight on the other side on the balance. Constraints disappear and new possibilities appear. In theory, it should work, but it is not guaranteed that it outweighs the downsides reasonably.
Given Blizzard's record (remember they changed Foxtrot Labs to only diagonal spawns), I seriously doubt they want asymmetrical maps. Also, they probably want all their maps to be playable for all races/matchups.
No they don't.
Really, when did they say that?
Lol he's just inferring from the current map pool, and a couple of choice ones we had in the past.
I do not have the gift of creating badass maps, but I do have a suggestion if anyone is interested. I have a rough layout and some map mechanics that bring back the creativity we saw back in broodwar. If anyone is interested and wants to make it just send me a pm
Some of the mechanics include neutral building blockers on high grounds behind mineral lines, single square gaps to allow direct routes for smaller units and mineral lines that open up the map once completely mined out.
I won't really have the time to do any mapmaking between now and the 10th, so I'm just going to submit Korhal Pale Ivy, Hell And Paradise, and old Cassiopeia. Cassiopeia is the best of these, but is too standard, essentially an inferior cousin of King Sejong. KPI is my favorite, but it is also too standard, plus it has like 3000 ivy doodads so it's right out. That leaves Hell And Paradise which has two in one spawns, a backdoor main, and gold bases, so it's probably super broken.
o wait that translates to 'creative' in DK language. see you all in WCS?
Whelp, might as well get started. This next work week is going to be pretty busy so I know I won't have much time to map besides today/tomorrow and then next weekend. I'm going to post four maps I'll be submitting, you may have seen them before (they are all on TL map section). I'll work on one final new map but if I can't get something new done I'll tweak up another existing old map. Either way, enjoy! =)
Shakuras Slaughter Experimental 2 player map. No ramps, tons of chokes. Zone control units & air play could be king. (All those "brick doodads" on the ground, most you can not walk or build on.)
Paradisia Very large 2 player map with tons of expand opportunities. Middle section is fairly choke heavy while around the edges of the map is more open.
Korhal Carnage Knockout 8 spawn map (your opponent can only spawn at the 3 farthest away bases from you). Very experimental. Backdoors into main! (Yippee!)
I have a great idea for not standard map, instead of one pocket expansions put in 2 pocket expansions and have choke points everywhere on the map. Very narrow ramps of course and limited air space behind main. No stupid gold expos. Would be best map ever.
On January 31 2016 07:42 ProtossMasterRace wrote: I have a great idea for not standard map, instead of one pocket expansions put in 2 pocket expansions and have choke points everywhere on the map. Very narrow ramps of course and limited air space behind main. No stupid gold expos. Would be best map ever.
Is there any chamce of mineral only expansions comong back? Theyre pretty common in sc bw iirc and I think they're very interesting. If they won't is there any chance for a expo with only 1 gas geyser?
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Hqei7Fe.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/p7khsU7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BmgAEy7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OOuvdWa.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bD3mOkd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fVTIAD0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uTekMl6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nOj1glB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JOwXYN2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XdHKij8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/C4gmNZL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/p6OvdxB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xFMO0L6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BukXZAI.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VB28GIh.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/C2DWVEH.jpg)
