EPTCongrats to the winners, good choices judges. I hope the eventual Blizzard picks are as diverse as the current finalists.
TLMC7 Finalists Announced - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
Congrats to the winners, good choices judges. I hope the eventual Blizzard picks are as diverse as the current finalists. | ||
|
ssg
United States1773 Posts
| ||
|
Jacky_
Korea (South)47 Posts
On May 20 2016 23:53 SidianTheBard wrote: New Gettysburg: Hi, welcome to sc2 I would like to build 1 barracks here. Okay, time to build a factory...hmm...guess I'll build that factory on the low ground by the Ulrena type bridge because there is no god damn room in the main, natural, 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc etc etc etc. It's an interesting map although air blockers tend to be very buggy. I also dont think they serve much of a point because libs, banshees, voids, oracles, mutas(?) seem like they should all be able to still harass & deny minerals/gas from behind the walls. It's also a very boring movement wise map, you go across the long ass choked bridge or you go north and fight in the wide open area. On May 21 2016 03:44 Fatam wrote: More brutal honesty: I don't think the "new" in New Gettysburg is going to work at all, I think people will only take the ground bases most of the time and it will just be Ulrena with more open bases. Ulrena is cool but I think this map was chosen because of the islands. The main issue I see here is that either you a) go for a fairly standard army that is mostly ground-based and you can't take the islands because you're on the ground, or b) you go for a more air-centered style but then you die to ground armies because the ground bases and surrounding areas are too open and the rush distance isn't that long even if you go around so you can't hold pushes that try to punish you. Terran can probably take the closer island base some of the time because they don't have to sacrifice as much to pull it off but it's kind of BS if terran is the only race able to take an island. Maybe some of the god Korean protosses can make it work, idk. Also as has been mentioned before, air blockers are super buggy, so there's that. Funny and great feedback. I just noticed, the main is very small now. Next, denying minerals/gas from behind the wall is planned. Air blocker is designed to drop with difficulty. If player want to deny minerals/gas in island expansion, need to infiltrate enemy position because resource's position is outside. And it is possible to deny minerals/gas. That's why players use air-units and take advantage in game. Monotonous map design is intended for players. I realize recently, complex design causes chaos for players. Novel(or complex) map design get praise by mapmakers, but general players hard to understand Novel(or complex) map design. I think we need to design maps easily. Every players are not Diamond, Master, Grand Master ranker. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
At least it doesn't have any square cliffs or it would be complete garbage :-P | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On May 21 2016 10:46 ssg wrote: Galactic Process is completely uninspiring. I hope it loses. Blatant copy. You go ahead and show me one feature on my map that's the same as on Cloud Kingdom. I can wait. Look at me wasting energy on such obvious spam. Probably time to turn in. | ||
|
Xenotolerance
United States464 Posts
somehow knowing that Avex didn't submit gojira under Gold category makes me salty as fuck >:[ | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
| ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
| ||
monk
United States8476 Posts
On May 20 2016 23:53 SidianTheBard wrote:+ Show Spoiler + Annihilation Station: Solid macro map, easy to grab natural & third, lots of movement throughout the entire map, enough bases to take. Apotheosis: This was one of my favorites, although not sure I'm a huge fan of the gold base (I told -0 this) and also I'm not sure I"m a fan of the rock tower/choke now. I feel like knocking down those rocks and placing a tank or two while you ferry units over is going to be a very deadly push for terran. (Think dash and terminal tanks shelling the natural from behind the rocks) Frozen Zone: Not really a fan of this one. You either have Polar Night Main/Nat/3rd, which we've already seen, or the whole main/nat/3rd hugging the main. Gold bases will never get used unless you're super far ahead. I also think it gets a little awkward to expand if you're going for late game. Cloud Kingdom 2.0: Should be a solid map. Great re-texture job!  ... Seriously though, the secret hallways are a nice touch although terran/protoss pushing zerg's natural from that hallway makes me a little nervous, not too much of a fan of the gold bases but the initial 4-5 bases are good. Plenty of great movement around the entire map.Korhal Killzone: My map, won't comment on because it's the perfect map (lol) Namaste: Okay, besides the aesthetics I do not like this map one bit. The top half is EXTREMELY choked. The bottom half will never get used. Even zerg, the only race that would like to expand towards the bottom would have to expand a loooong as hell way away to get to that base. It's been awhile since we played Ohana but I really don't want to see wonwonwon 24/7 again. Seriously the entire top half has like single wide forcefield chokes, no places for surrounds and you can even knock down a rock tower to completely block off any chance of the zerg flanking you. Paladino Terminal: It's a decent rush map, but pathing seems a little boring, but since it's super small there isn't a whole lot you can do with pathing. The middle choke is neat (I believe it blocks the bigger units?) This map should never get past 4 base vs 4 base as it'll just be too aggressive (nothing wrong with that though) Shiva: It could play for very interesting games, I like the "moonlight madness" rock tower that the enemy can break down on the offensive to lock out the natural from the third. Not sure I'm a huge fan of the northeast section of the map, seems everything is always going to gravitate towards the southwest/middle. Terran taking the gold as their third and parade pushing in might be a little too strong, especially if you set up a tank or two by the other gold and shell over into the natural. Aiur Plateau: Perfect example of a new map. Unfortunately with all new maps, if it got ladder it'd probably be veto'd more then Korhal Carnage (I can make this joke because that was my map...) I can't even wrap my head around how this would play to be honest. It's very neat and well thought out. Would 12 pool be too strong since there are two (technically three) entrances into the main? Would any speedling opener be too strong? Tough to say without playing it a ton. Dasan Station: The main/aggressive gold seem to be the only interesting things on this map. I'll love to see how that is going to play out but the rest of the map is just boring to me and I don't know if it'll ever get used. The 2oclock & 8oclock part of the map is soooo far away by ground that expanding there (and defending) is going to be tough so you're always going to see people expanding behind their gold minerals but then you have to worry about the super aggressive path in the middle all the while looping alllll the way back around to defend your natural/3rd. Eris: Not too much of a fan of this map either, I prefered other Uvantak maps over this one. I do like the main/nat/3rd setup but after that I think it gets a little boring. All bases hugging the edges, a ton of rocks to prevent any early game movement. The gold bases just seem & feel awkward and I don't think will ever get used. Uvantak has a million great maps and at least for me, this isn't one of them. New Gettysburg: Hi, welcome to sc2 I would like to build 1 barracks here. Okay, time to build a factory...hmm...guess I'll build that factory on the low ground by the Ulrena type bridge because there is no god damn room in the main, natural, 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc etc etc etc. It's an interesting map although air blockers tend to be very buggy. I also dont think they serve much of a point because libs, banshees, voids, oracles, mutas(?) seem like they should all be able to still harass & deny minerals/gas from behind the walls. It's also a very boring movement wise map, you go across the long ass choked bridge or you go north and fight in the wide open area. Caldeum Plateau: I like this map a lot, especially mid/late game. Although I would like it better if the inbase natural didn't have the debris on it, otherwise the other natural you can take just feels so far away with a lot of chokes you have to defend. The early game scares me on this map so I feel you'll see a lot of non-sense right away. If it gets to mid/late game I like this map a ton. Either remove the debris or block off the ramp by the natural that goes toward the gold, then the attack has to commit to either attacking from the gold base into that tight choke or they'll have to commit the entire other way up the ramp and into your natural. Flame Juggler: Best gold map, I liked it a ton when Fatam originally posted it. Easy natural, aggressive gold that forces movement on the northeast side of the map or else your gold will get denied. Bottom half open but more base dense for the zerg, top half less base dense but chokier for the others. Close 3rd if you choose not to gold it. A+ Gojira Greenhouse: Some of the movement on this map will feel a little awkward especially with the gold base mineral walls. I think I would try to open the map up a little more in certain areas because some of it seems a little too choked off. I like the main/downramp natural/gold base mineral wall, but I dislike the other "natural" choice. It's very fair away and the path to get to it (with those 4 high ground overlord pods) seems unneccassary. I think if we could open the map up a little more and change up that 2oclock/8oclock "natural/3rd" regular base a bit it'd be a solid map. ___ Either way, take this feedback as you will, congrats to all finalists! Excited to see these maps played! On May 21 2016 07:54 Semmo wrote:+ Show Spoiler + My thoughts on the maps! Macro Maps: Annihilation Station: I don't know why this map is special, even as a macro map. For me it looks ugly because it's just squarey and there seems to be not much flow so yeah. Apotheosis: Pretty nice map, I like how it made the really long map idea work. Also I love bridges so yeah. Frozen Zone: Uhh okay... The surface area for mains is way too big, and there are no rewards for that. You're forced to take down the rocks to take the back expo which I think isn't good. It's also quite ugly so I think it'll need ugly in the cliff aesthetics etc. Galactic Process: I wonder if the back rocks near the 11 o clock and 5 o clock are needed, seems a bit redundant to me. Natural might be a bit too hard. Rush Maps: Korhal Killzone: I don't really have an opinion on this map, but I hate square cliffs (my pet peeve). Seems ok. Namaste: What the hell is going on at the bottom of the map? Just seems rather shit... everything is far apart and there are so many redundant features. If it's supposed to be rush map, why are there random shit going on the map that doesn't add to it? Also, please no square cliffs.. The contrast of colors is nice though. Palandino Terminal: Pretty cool map, feels like a throwback to WoL. I hope it works. I feel like it might not work though. Would've liked narrower ramps at the rocked ramps, though. Shiva: I like the look of this map. It's an attempt at 45 degree mirror that works like a rota symmetric, so I hope it works. New Maps: Air Plateau: The top and the bottom of the map should have been more elaborate I think, just a thin path for so long seems a bit dull. Fun idea though. Dasan Station: Fun map, I wish the outskirts of the map would have been better used though. Eris: The rock positioning kinda discourages the use of the whole map, I wish that aspect was fixed. the top left and bottom right corners are not well done though imo. New Gettysburg: I feel like there too many islands perhaps. It might encourage air play, but I feel that it might become a win more feature. The rest of the map is well done, good flow and all. Gold Maps: Caldeum Plateau: Only two golds are placed well, the 3 o clock and 9 o clock ones. Others are pretty badly placed... Front natural is just weirdly shaped and doesn't increase the quality of the map at all, just gimmicky honestly. However, bridge+. Flame Juggler: Hearthstone okay. Looks like that changed Blizzard map changed again. I don't know if this map will work? Probably not... But It should have been rush map, not a gold map. Might work. Gojira GreenHouse: Adjective Noun. The idea of gold minerals blocking paths is a good one, but it'd be better suited for more closed off map. Except for the backdoor, the other one at the middle of the map are kinda meh... Center cliffs are just weird and II don't like it. Square Cliffs-. Also, shame on you for having no 4p maps. Those are way cooler if done right. I can get behind almost all of these comments and they very well reflected the judges' way of thinking. The only thing I might have some trouble getting behind is Semmo's criticism of Caldeum Plateau. I think he has to explain it better. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
First the maps themselves. Macro Anni, not really gonna comment. Apotheosis, cool shit, finaly a good pick between TLMC finalists Frozen zone, okay, but not really spectacular, why this is deserving of a finalist spot is beyond my comprehension. Galagtic process, Solid adaption of Cloud kingdom with plenty of it's own additions, my only problem with this map is that it will probably get overrated far to hard based of it in some way representing cloud kingdom. Rush. Kohral Killzone, map confuses me a bit, the rush distance says rush map, the chokepoints say turtlefest with 0 room for error given the rush distance. Namaste, Map feels awkward in some areas, it has a short rush distance and hard 3rds, which I gues make for good rush maps, but the chokepoints just completely disincentivize aggression beyond killing your opponents attempt at taking a 3rd, predicting any early-midgame balance issues in the game to be most visible on this map.The best use of the bottom side of the map will probably be the occasional game where someone hides a base there, not expecting much use of that space. not sure if it's a wasted finalist spot, or just a rather meager one. Paladino terminal, Proportions are off along the center, I suggest moving the ramps to the center back a bit into the high grounds and expanding the center low ground paths. Meh choice, also feels rather poorly executed,. Shiva, not gonna comment much on this, my only grudge is that it took so long to get picked up. It's not really the style of maps I like, but it's still pretty good. New maps Aiur plateau, looks interesting at first glance, but the more I look at it, I get a feeling that it's just stacking tons of features that make no sense to have put in, in the hopes of being 3complicated5u. at least aesthetics are on point. Dasan, theres good reasons why this is so unique, it's general design breaks some core design issues, I won't go into full length on that because that would include writing something 3 times the size of this entire rant. Eris, I'm not really feeling the rocks here, it just screams turtly early game with a weird mid-lategame. Gettysburg, Ulrena done right, outside of that not sure if I like how hard it is to avoid our enemy in a direct confrontation, probably lots of deathballing on this one. Gold Caldeum plateau, So many expos behind so few points, not feeling it for this one. Flame Juggler, another map where you'll probably see the corners go to waste. Gojira, the chokes, this map feels like poor spatial design. Overal Picks range from meh to good, there are no real design nightmares plagueing this one unlike previous TLMCs, surprising since theres so many finalists spots now even. The contest itself I still have major issues with the organization and design of the contest, but before I get to that, some areas that I like: finalists expanded to 15: pretty nice since finalists was always the only thing that mattered, with more finalists in this once an aeon contest at least theres more potential for maps to break through. categories: avoiding the catastrophe of TLMC6 where almost every map was a backdoor map is nice. Now, back to the remaining issues. Judges & Judging. arguably the biggest problem with this contest still, and this one has several sub issues even. One of those is judge demographics and bias, there is a noticeable difference in the style of maps getting through based on the judges, the judging panel for a large part still dictates what style of maps even get through to being properly tested. Which brings me to another problem with judging, a complete lack of understanding on map design. there are very few people that excell in all areas a judge would ideally have good understanding off, with pro players there's no lack of gameplay and balance, but it ends there, their assumptions are not always as strong fundamentaly unless given plenty of time to really understand a map. Even if you get someone that is knowledgable on both these areas, you still get the highly complicated aspect of "what is good design" I'm not sure if this is a problem that will be solved anytime soon, so my hopes go out to a more refinded judging process. Moving on to comments. On May 20 2016 22:00 ivancype wrote: So.... Daybreak, Bel'Shir Vestige, Polar Night and Clould Kingdom, Did Proleague help select the maps? Classic example of complete lack of understanding on map design. On May 20 2016 22:34 SidianTheBard wrote: Apparently to win a TLMC you just need to Re-texture cloud kingdom 6 TLMC's later! trolololol  It's a good map on it's own, but I just feel theres some underlying truth to this. On May 20 2016 22:56 IIEclipseII wrote: In my personal opinion, the quality of Demise on the Temple is superior to maps that are in the Finalists here. Of course you can blame me that im not subjective. But People who played my map enyojed it and had a lot of fun. Nonetheless there are 3 maps of Avex in the Finalists. Wouldn't it be fair to make it not that one sided. And we all know that Basetrade TV uses Avex's maps, but I'd like to believe that Basetrase TV had no influence in the map election. But the election has a smell of nepotism. You'll come to understand your own lack of understanding later. On May 20 2016 23:00 Aunvilgodess wrote: Hope Namaste and Apotheosis make it. Good luck to you guys. But I think the need for "rush maps" is dumb. A rush, in most cases, takes place in front of another players natural and main base, while the rest of the map is completely irrelevant. What a dumb request by Blizzard. somewhat agree and disagree, I don't think rush is a proper category, it should've been named micro as opposed to the macro category imo. On May 20 2016 23:15 MrMcScribbles wrote: Great Job everyone! Blizzard is lucky to have such a skilled community. One would think more maps would be available throughout all expansions of Starcraft. I'm sure these finalist maps took time, effort, and work. This wealth of quality input for 1k$, from a worldwide company like Blizzard, seems like a bit of a steal to me. Can't wait to watch the Tourney! Money in mapping is a weird thing, it's not really something we do for money, but it takes up a fuckload of time for us, to the point where some form of compensation seems appropriate, I don't have a clue where the grey area for that would lie. To give some perspective, If I spent every hour working on Annihilation Station, working a minimum wage job instead, it would end up just a bit below the ammount of money as the first place awards. On May 20 2016 23:25 algue wrote: Don't get salty, boys. Plenty of us wish we had our map in the last remaining 15. Be glad that you had the chance to participate rather than complain that opinions on the quality of a map are subjective. Sportmanship is important I still have plenty of salt cans from the past few years On May 20 2016 23:49 Namrufus wrote: Hey the TL home page says "TLMC Winners Announced". Anyway, I guess one of my maps is a finalist - pretty cool. I'm surprised that Blizzard allowed the unbuildable blockers at the inbase nat on Caldeum Plateau. (Not that I'm upset about it, I'm glad that this nonstandard use is now "ladder approved") Anyway, I'm flipping crazy hyped for the BasetradeTV tournament - holy shit! In some form, these are winners, all the other maps didn't even see the light of day, that to me is still a huge issue with TLMC. Rant over | ||
|
monk
United States8476 Posts
| ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
| ||
|
Xenotolerance
United States464 Posts
It sounds like there were three or more ratings given on a 1-10 scale by each judge to each map that made it to a certain point. Creativity, aesthetics, layout, ...? These were then averaged, and the highest maps for each category / highest 15 overall were the finalists. Am I close? If this is generally the idea, you create a problem where many of the finalists are maps whose best quality is being inoffensive - a map that gets 10 10 10 from one judge but 5 5 5 from another scores lower than a map that gets 8's across the board. So maybe the first map is genius and the second judge didn't see it, or maybe it's shite and the first judge is overrating it - but we'll never know, because the comparatively inoffensive, probably mediocre second map gets through. You need to use a system that's less prone to Average, because you don't want Average maps as finalists, you want Great maps. So maybe it's a round robin head to head comparison, and the top X are finalists, or maybe it's that every judge ranks maps 1-23 independently of each other and the top 15 are finalists, or something along those lines. But points are definitely not the way to go... If you're interested in something that's objective, or in other words Unbiased, you're not going to find it, because it doesn't exist. Just acknowledge whatever bias the judges do have, and work with it, and make the best selection you can instead of accepting that a bunch of the finalists aren't even appealing to most of the judges. Here's to TLMC8 having a better process and better maps | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
On May 21 2016 11:35 Jacky_ wrote: Monotonous map design is intended for players. I realize recently, complex design causes chaos for players. Novel(or complex) map design get praise by mapmakers, but general players hard to understand Novel(or complex) map design. I think we need to design maps easily. Every players are not Diamond, Master, Grand Master ranker. preach it | ||
|
Mightygear
81 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
I think a menagerie of people who know the game well and have a lot of experience with maps is all you can ask for, assuming that those people are willing to put the time in and take it seriously. I like throwing a couple pro players in there, they may not be able to judge maps as well but they can point out shit that someone that is just masters or w/e might not catch. Rating system seems fine, maybe next time reconsider the categories a tiny bit but they were mostly a good idea. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Cluster__
United States328 Posts
| ||
|
Xenotolerance
United States464 Posts
On May 21 2016 22:14 Barrin wrote: I agree the wording is confusing, but this is what it means: There were four ratings given on a 1-10 scale (1) overall (2) layout (3) creativity (4) aesthetics (1) is not an average of (2), (3), and (4), but rather its own fully independent score. Only (1) was used for deciding the top 15. So basically this is what was done. Not really, there's a salient difference between giving each map a 10 point rating then take the average from all judges, and having to decide on rankings 1-23 and filter the outcome, especially in how you can weigh the rankings. I'd want to see something like, Every judge's first choice is a finalist, every judge's second choice is a finalist unless two other judges veto, every judge's third choice is a finalist unless one other judge vetos. Fill in what's left by aggregate rankings. This way the judges can exercise their judgment more directly, and you'd get fewer Indifferent results. Thank you for clearing up the ratings btw, I appreciate it and let me be clear, I don't think the judges did anything wrong, so it's not a criticism of you as people or judges or anything like that. I just think if the same judges made the same evaluations in a different process, they'd end up with a stronger pool of finalists | ||
| ||
