On May 22 2016 22:55 Barrin wrote: The risk of a visionary judge being diluted does not outweigh the risk of a poor judge having too much say. That's some serious self-serving bias.
it's not self-serving, it's obvious by now my self wouldn't be served by any judging process. at this point I'm disagreeing with the principle of averaging being better than not, rather than disagreeing with the judging process. I think this is off topic so I'll keep it chill
the wisdom of crowds is a great thing. the judge team may or may not meet the listed four requirements for a wise crowd. I lean toward not, and from the outside it looks like they leaned into one of the failures of crowd decision making, that being too much communication. in other words I just don't think wise crowd theory applies here. it still seems apparent to me that strong individual choices would produce good results.
interesting bit from the article:
In the online article Digital Maoism, Lanier argues that the collective is more likely to be smart only when
1. it isn't defining its own questions
2. the goodness of an answer can be evaluated by a simple result (such as a single numeric value), and
3. the information system which informs the collective is filtered by a quality control mechanism that relies on individuals to a high degree.
Lanier argues that only under those circumstances can a collective be smarter than a person. If any of these conditions are broken, the collective becomes unreliable or worse.
interpretations will vary but I think only #3 applied to this judging process. hence, if it's crowd theory, the judge collective was 'unreliable or worse.' I don't think that was the case, so the theory doesn't fit the situation here. it seems like the judging process was more like the Delphi method with rounds of refined answers, but without anonymity, nor repeated revisions at each stage, and with too much communication to really fit the model. good read though, as you said, and I thank you for it
After reading through a bunch of the judging process discussion here, as someone who never created and submitted a map to the TLMC (until this one) primarily because the judging process was so unclear/controversial, I must say that it is extremely disappointing to see that a map scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category and another map clearly made it to this point based on aesthetics alone, not design.
It would also be incredibly useful, as many others have been asking, if every mapmaker could get messaged with, at the very least, the scores of our own maps once that process is finished. Seeing maps that scream out as being in the completely wrong category, nearly the exact same first three bases being copied from another map, or the same mapmaker's names showing up over and over in the finals doesn't really help the community imo. Getting scores for the maps we submitted or some other quick and simple feedback would absolutely encourage everyone who participated to continue to do so in the future.
That being said, I love seeing new map designs come to the ladder and high profile tournaments and also ways for people who have never touched the SC2 Editor to get turned on to mapmaking. The TLMCs and the BTTV tournament are pretty fantastic for all of that and some of the maps here really look great.
On May 23 2016 07:26 blunderfulguy wrote: After reading through a bunch of the judging process discussion here, as someone who never created and submitted a map to the TLMC (until this one) primarily because the judging process was so unclear/controversial, I must say that it is extremely disappointing to see that a map scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category and another map clearly made it to this point based on aesthetics alone, not design.
It would also be incredibly useful, as many others have been asking, if every mapmaker could get messaged with, at the very least, the scores of our own maps once that process is finished. Seeing maps that scream out as being in the completely wrong category, nearly the exact same first three bases being copied from another map, or the same mapmaker's names showing up over and over in the finals doesn't really help the community imo. Getting scores for the maps we submitted or some other quick and simple feedback would absolutely encourage everyone who participated to continue to do so in the future.
That being said, I love seeing new map designs come to the ladder and high profile tournaments and also ways for people who have never touched the SC2 Editor to get turned on to mapmaking. The TLMCs and the BTTV tournament are pretty fantastic for all of that and some of the maps here really look great.
The judging process is fully explained here. You can also request feedback on your map in the same thread. We simply do not have the time to give all 130 maps feedback.
The judging process as a whole is not actually very controversial; there are just is just a vocal minority arguing against the current system.
No map "scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category". No map made it purely based on aesthetics. Only one mapmaker had more than one finalist submission this TLMC. The reason the same mappers show up again and again over multiple TLMCs is that they're the most skilled and experienced mappers.
On May 23 2016 07:26 blunderfulguy wrote: After reading through a bunch of the judging process discussion here, as someone who never created and submitted a map to the TLMC (until this one) primarily because the judging process was so unclear/controversial, I must say that it is extremely disappointing to see that a map scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category and another map clearly made it to this point based on aesthetics alone, not design.
It would also be incredibly useful, as many others have been asking, if every mapmaker could get messaged with, at the very least, the scores of our own maps once that process is finished. Seeing maps that scream out as being in the completely wrong category, nearly the exact same first three bases being copied from another map, or the same mapmaker's names showing up over and over in the finals doesn't really help the community imo. Getting scores for the maps we submitted or some other quick and simple feedback would absolutely encourage everyone who participated to continue to do so in the future.
That being said, I love seeing new map designs come to the ladder and high profile tournaments and also ways for people who have never touched the SC2 Editor to get turned on to mapmaking. The TLMCs and the BTTV tournament are pretty fantastic for all of that and some of the maps here really look great.
The judging process is fully explained here. You can also request feedback on your map in the same thread. We simply do not have the time to give all 130 maps feedback.
Telling us we can ask on the forums about any specifics disregards those who are too busy to have long discussions on the forums due to work and so on, but of course I understand that there is a small team on your end providing feedback, etc. It would be fantastic to get more info throughout the judging process in the future, fingers crossed.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:The judging process as a whole is not actually very controversial; there are just is just a vocal minority arguing against the current system.
"The judging process is not actually very controversial" to you perhaps. However, to others, it has previously been or is currently a bit hazy. "Using this slightly different system would only change one of the final maps" to me is "someone may have gotten screwed out of hundreds of dollars", which is unsettling. Without the vocal minority this discussion would never happen and the vocal minority here is a part of the "wisdom of crowds" mentioned above. Imo the judging system is fine but not perfect, and this talk keeps us assured of you thinking about everyone in the whole process and that we can trust the judges decisions. "Just a vocal minority" is just pretty darn important in any community.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:No map "scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category". No map made it purely based on aesthetics.
What I've read around here is "I don't see why X map made it in Y category" or "X map should be in Y cat." and the entire rush map cat. clearly meant something different to the judges than the creators and it isn't a great thing. I also see "X map which scored high in part because it looks pretty doesn't feel as good from a gameplay design p.o.v. as other maps" and it feels wrong to me. I look forward to seeing the map categories and better examples in the next contest, having a better description of the judging/scoring shown with the next contest could help with a lot.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:Only one mapmaker had more than one finalist submission this TLMC. The reason the same mappers show up again and again over multiple TLMCs is that they're the most skilled and experienced mappers.
Again, not providing a small bit of useful info like the scores indirectly prevents some people from better understanding the map design TL and Blizzard are looking for and, to keep it simple, indirectly makes the rich get richer. We should want more people reaching that level of map design instead of being careless and potentially only seeing the same people/groups win repeatedly. I think I can say for a lot of people we want the judges and community to care about the contest, all contestants, and the map pool being as great as possible
Designing for this contest was great, but after the finalists were announced there were some deep sighs. I'm glad I decided to stop sweating over finishing my "rush" map to focus on my "macro" map, but if I knew about the importance of a good color scheme I would have worked in a very different way for this. It would be nice to not feel that way next time and I feel like I have to point that out as a newcomer since there aren't already hundreds of people talking about it.
Even with all that nitty gritty gunk said, I am stoked for the Map Test Tournament!!! I'm out, enough walls of text to last me (and probably everyone else, my bad) quite a while. Glhf everyone!
On May 23 2016 07:26 blunderfulguy wrote: After reading through a bunch of the judging process discussion here, as someone who never created and submitted a map to the TLMC (until this one) primarily because the judging process was so unclear/controversial, I must say that it is extremely disappointing to see that a map scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category and another map clearly made it to this point based on aesthetics alone, not design.
It would also be incredibly useful, as many others have been asking, if every mapmaker could get messaged with, at the very least, the scores of our own maps once that process is finished. Seeing maps that scream out as being in the completely wrong category, nearly the exact same first three bases being copied from another map, or the same mapmaker's names showing up over and over in the finals doesn't really help the community imo. Getting scores for the maps we submitted or some other quick and simple feedback would absolutely encourage everyone who participated to continue to do so in the future.
That being said, I love seeing new map designs come to the ladder and high profile tournaments and also ways for people who have never touched the SC2 Editor to get turned on to mapmaking. The TLMCs and the BTTV tournament are pretty fantastic for all of that and some of the maps here really look great.
The judging process is fully explained here. You can also request feedback on your map in the same thread. We simply do not have the time to give all 130 maps feedback.
Telling us we can ask on the forums about any specifics disregards those who are too busy to have long discussions on the forums due to work and so on, but of course I understand that there is a small team on your end providing feedback, etc. It would be fantastic to get more info throughout the judging process in the future, fingers crossed.
It takes 30s at most to ask for feedback on your map. If you had the time to enter the contest, you definitely have enough time to ask a question on the forum and have monk respond to it. You might not like what the judges thought, but at least you'll get an idea of what they're thinking.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:The judging process as a whole is not actually very controversial; there are just is just a vocal minority arguing against the current system.
"The judging process is not actually very controversial" to you perhaps. However, to others, it has previously been or is currently a bit hazy. "Using this slightly different system would only change one of the final maps" to me is "someone may have gotten screwed out of hundreds of dollars", which is unsettling. Without the vocal minority this discussion would never happen and the vocal minority here is a part of the "wisdom of crowds" mentioned above. Imo the judging system is fine but not perfect, and this talk keeps us assured of you thinking about everyone in the whole process and that we can trust the judges decisions. "Just a vocal minority" is just pretty darn important in any community.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:No map "scored very high and made it to this stage of judging despite the fact that it doesn't fit into its submitted category". No map made it purely based on aesthetics.
What I've read around here is "I don't see why X map made it in Y category" or "X map should be in Y cat." and the entire rush map cat. clearly meant something different to the judges than the creators and it isn't a great thing. I also see "X map which scored high in part because it looks pretty doesn't feel as good from a gameplay design p.o.v. as other maps" and it feels wrong to me. I look forward to seeing the map categories and better examples in the next contest, having a better description of the judging/scoring shown with the next contest could help with a lot.
So three things (a) This was the first time doing cateogories, there will be bumps along the way in comprehension from all parties. Some would argue that its better than previous seasons where no direction at all was given. (b) The vast majority of maps were submitted into the correct category or categories. But even then, if we felt a map was better placed elsewhere it got fair consideration in that cateogry. (e.g. Gojira was scored as a macro map and separately as gold map and it did much better in the gold category than macro). (c) Aesthetics are a part of map making, like it or hate it. The role it plays in judging is more of a tiebreaker than anything else. No map is selected on aesthetics alone.
On May 23 2016 07:51 monk wrote:Only one mapmaker had more than one finalist submission this TLMC. The reason the same mappers show up again and again over multiple TLMCs is that they're the most skilled and experienced mappers.
Again, not providing a small bit of useful info like the scores indirectly prevents some people from better understanding the map design TL and Blizzard are looking for and, to keep it simple, indirectly makes the rich get richer. We should want more people reaching that level of map design instead of being careless and potentially only seeing the same people/groups win repeatedly. I think I can say for a lot of people we want the judges and community to care about the contest, all contestants, and the map pool being as great as possible
Maps don't get a numerical score until the last round of judging. Up until that points it's a yes or a no (with discussion). These discussions take place mostly on skype (or equivalent) and it would be inappropriate to copy and paste a skype chat. There were over 100 maps submitted to this contest, it would be impractical for us to write a paragraph explaining why each of these 100+ maps didn't make it. Like even with conservative estimates of 50 words/map thats 5000 words. That's why we elect for people to opt into feedback; we get maybe 20 maps that people want feedback on and thats much more manageable (and still a crapload better than many real world contests that are similar).
It's also worth pointing out that the following are first time finalists; Meavis, Kycsyhuszar, Newsunshine (at least in 1v1), Avex, Namrufus, th0t. Fatam. Thats a pretty significant proportion of first time finalists; it's definitely not the case that its just one group of mappers with a monopoly over TLMC.
Nice resource that established some geyser rules that isn't well enough known it seems. Watching some of the tourney, I noticed some of the maps have some geysers that are obviously inefficient. If one of your finalist maps has diagonal geysers you should probably fix that up.
I haven’t watched all the games of the map test tournament yet (I haven’t seen all of the Ro8 games or any of the semis), so I might add to this later on once I’ve watched the VODs.
ANNIHILATION STATION- The most standard of the maps. In the tournament runbys performed strongly on this map, which made trying to secure 4 bases slightly more difficult than the average LotV map. I think this is closer to a middle-of-the-road map than a macro map. There’s no large weaknesses to it except that it doesn’t really stand out.
APOTHEOSIS- I liked the map when I first saw it and after seeing games on it I still like it. Three base pushes where you use the gold base and the choke near the rocks as staging point to assault the other bases proved to be very strong in the tournament especially from terran (for example uThermal vs Nerchio). Zergs might not like the map as much because of this.
FROZEN ZONE- I initially though the map was too big, and too “messy” and the games have reinforced that belief. The play around the middle and watchtower proved to be pretty good, but not good enough to compensate for the problems inherent to its size. Maybe I’m biased due to the games in the tournament mostly being in the longer spawn positions, but still not a fan at all.
GALACTIC PROCESS- This is the map that overperformed the most for me. I initially didn’t like the aesthetics, or the natural, and everything else was just okay. After seeing the games however everything turned out to be much better than I thought before (even the aesthetics). Sure the side passages proved mostly useless, but the middle of the map was impressively dynamic. I’m extremely impressed with the positioning of the ramps, rocks, watchtowers, and LOS blocker. It might not be especially creative or ground-breaking map but it plays extremely well which is the most important thing. Proxy reaper builds were really strong on it, which is kinda unfortunate, but not to a map-breaking extent. Also the constant comments about Cloud Kingdom from everyone are annoying.
KORHAL KILLZONE- Taking a third is really difficult on this map, which I guess was more or less expected from a map in the “Rush” category. Additionally two base pushes that abuse how close the natural minerals are to the edge of the base (like MaSa did against Neeb) seem pretty strong. The extremely open third and even more open fourth probably has some balance-concerns associated with it. Overall only an okay-ish map, but the other “Rush” maps have disappointed me even more, so idk maybe this category just isn’t that great.
NAMASTE- All the chokes around the top of the map are massively abusable by siege tank and pushes and the like. From the first game seen on this map (where beastyqt abused tanks to siege Lambo’s gold) to the last (where uThermal abused the narrow choke between the main/natural/top centre base) it’s shown itself problematic balance-wise. The bottom of the map is bad too, overly spacious, but since nothing ever happened in the bottom of the map (which is pretty common from horizontally symmetric maps. Even Habitation Station had that problem) I can’t tell for sure how it would play out. I really dislike this map (though it’s pretty). Also the tileset is problematic since it makes liberator circles harder to see, and the way the tiles are visible through the creep isn’t great visibility-wise either.
PALADINO TERMINAL- The double opening to the natural proved to be as awkward as everyone expected it to be. Lots of runbys as a result. Also the third-base gas is harassable by marines standing on the high ground which isn’t ideal. I dislike the third and fourth which just have one opening at the front, and think the version Namrufus posted in his thread is marginally better. All the features on the map just weren’t really used (in the games I saw no one broke down any of the rocks, or tried to block the middle path, and use of the main base LOS blockers was minimal) by the pros, which isn’t good. The games themselves on this map turned out to be surprisingly decent though despite all of its flaws.
SHIVA- The thirds on this map are really really close, and have no terrain but ramps separating them. Also they happen to be very vulnerable due to the double-edge collapsible rocks which seem to be FotM right now. As such the games that didn’t end due to weird rushes (which was very common on this map, though I think that was more bad luck rather than any characteristic of the map itself) end with a push-or-counterpush between the thirds. Basically pushes towards the third are so strong that someone will go for it, and if the push fails the distances are so short the other player is almost obligated to counterpush until the games end. I’m not completely against that, but it might make the games really one-dimensional in the long run. Maybe it would be better if the thirds were slightly more defensible.
AIUR PLATEAU- This map is a personal favourite of mine due to how novel and brilliant the design is, and how mind-bending the gameplay on it. It’s sad that we only got to see a few games on it, but the games that we did see were mostly really good. Additionally they were all mirrors (except for the Nerchio vs uThermal game which ended abruptly due to Nerchio misplacing his lings) which gives very little inkling as to the balance of this map even if the players knew how to play on it. The reasons this map won’t reach ladder are all the reasons I like it for.
DASAN STATION- This map too is very novel, but also happens to be very broken. We had maybe two reasonable games on this map. You can siege the main ramp from across the doodads, and can siege the main gas geyser from the gold natural. The play around the back of the gold base was kinda cool, but overall this map is clearly a failure.
ERIS- I’m interested in knowing why the pros were so reluctant to play on this map. The games seen on this map weren’t bad (the ZvZ between Bly and Scarlett was especially good). I don’t have much to say about this map except that the 3 bases in the top right and bottom left seem like an afterthought to the map.
NEW GETTYSBURG- Another map that overperformed compared to my expectations (which were admittedly really pessimistic about it). There were many good games on this map, and most of them had nothing to do with the island bases. The ramp and the top of the map were both very creatively used by the players. The air blockers didn’t do much in the matches I saw except repeatedly trap stray air units—the map is better off without them. I’m not convinced the map is completely balanced, but that’s something that we’ll have to see if the map makes.
CALDEUM PLATEAU- This map felt pretty gimmicky. The collapsible rocks and the passageway leading to the natural felt a bit weird. Shiva and Apotheosis implemented the double-edged collapsible rocks better. The pocket vulnerable was very vulnerable to harass or pushing, and the golds didn’t have a core role on this map (though Nerchio and Snute did take it early on occasion). The fact that you can see the top of the ramp from across the passageway is problematic (though it might have been fixed).
FLAME JUGGLER- I haven’t seen most of the games on this map and will reserve my opinion until I’ve seen more of them. The games I did see didn’t leave a very strong impression either way. Much like the other nominees in the gold base category it’s “interesting high yield use” is suspect. I saw Nerchio take the gold once on it I guess.
GOJIRA GREENHOUSE- It’s kinda odd that this map is in the gold base category, but whatever suits Blizzard I guess. I don’t think the mineral wall feature is particularly well implemented on this map though. There would not have been the slightest difference in any of the games if the mineral wall at the pocket natural was replaced with an actual wall. The ones on the right and left actually turned out to be relevant once or twice with harassment from the other side of the minerals. Mineral walls should only be used if it’s a base that you want open to harass from behind. I wouldn’t mind the mineral wall at the natural if you could actually place a town hall next to them. The sight blockers behind the pocket natural were kinda buggy, and I think the map would be better without them entirely. Overall however the map turned out to be a pretty good macro map. Also Nerchio mentioned one of the gases (at the fourth I think) was broken during the final series, so I hope Avex is aware of it.
If I had to rank the maps as they currently are (with no regard for category) I’d rank them:
1. Aiur Plateau 2. Apotheosis 3. Galactic Process 4. New Gettysburg 5. Gojira Greenhouse 6. Annihilation Station 7. Korhal Killzone 8. Flame Juggler?? 9. Shiva 10. Eris?? 11. Paladino Terminal 12. Caldeum Plateau 13. Frozen Zone 14. Namaste 15. Dasan Station
I’m really uncertain as to the internal ordering of ranks 6-12, and placing Aiur Plateau as number 1 is just me being extremely biased towards how beautiful its design is (if I was being more objective it’s probably rank 6 or something)
I think I am the only person who absolutely hates Gojira Greenhouse. + Show Spoiler +
As someone said the mineral wall near the nat could literally be a normal wall of doodads or w/e and accomplish the same thing. I strongly feel that Zerg is in a terrible spot on this map. For a short while they will nydus or ovie drop with some success but once people figure out to look for that stuff I think Z winrate will be terrible.
But I seem to like Caldeum a lot more than other people, so I guess the universe balances out :-P I think there's a lot of strategic possibility in Caldeum. There are 1 or 2 possibly iffy abusable tank spots and maybe the in-base nat should only be 1 unbuildable rock instead of 2 (or some other variation on the idea), but overall I really like the map. I think a medium ramp added to the 3/9 bases (and deleting the 2/8 gold bases beneath to make room, as they will very very rarely be taken) could really alleviate the potential turtle problems the map has without changing the map very much. Why is that base so easy anyway?
I really wanted to continue to hate New Gettysburg for the use of buggy No Fly Zones (NFZs) (+ Show Spoiler +
we've known they're broken for years, we've tried to make them work but they don't. Yet someone uses them and everyone acts like NFZs are something new that no one has thought of before. Believe me, if the SC2 engine supported NFZs properly, mapmakers would have been having a field day with them for years now
), and the fact that the layout at a glance is not terribly inspiring, but take out the NFZs and I think the map is pretty good. It's a really nice, simple variation / mix on the Ulrena / Scrap Station concept and it seems to produce good games. I'll admit to being wrong on this one (although I was right about the NFZs from the beginning :-P).
I rather liked Korhal Killzone too. That neeb vs. nerchio game was siiiick. Nerchio was just about to pincher neeb's forward third from both sides with an incredibly epic flank when neeb sent a small attack to nerchio's third? which meant nerchio had to send one of the pinching armies home. Lots of back and forth; both players were on a knife's edge at various points. Very fun game I thought.
I wish we saw more of Eris, hard to know anything substantial about that map still.
Just random comments spurred by what people have been saying on this page, those aren't necessarily my favorite maps. Lots of good maps overall, lots to like. Most of the maps in the macro category seemed to work well. You could probably pick randomly from the list and come out with a good pool.
Strongly agree with most of ZigguratOfUr's oppinions on maps, good stuff!
Paladino Terminal: Just add destructible rocks in one of the entrances to the nat and place some doodad so the gas at the third can't be killed by marines in the high ground?
The rush maps feel really weak in general, it was just a difficult category. At least Paladino Terminal might work better with these minimal changes I guess.
Shiva: Could just make the whole center part of the map symmetrical so you can also move one of the naturals to the other side (diagonal symmetry?). That way the thirds would not face each other, which is the big issue. Big changes I know.
Caldeum Plateau: Move/protect somehow the pocket natural so it's not so easy to harass? I actually like this map.
New Gettysburg: Lose the air blockers please? They looked cool but after watching the games they are just awkward. Love this map.
Gojira Greenhouse: Again, could lose the sight blockers behind the pocket nat.
My ranking atm:
1. Galactic Process 2. Apotheosis 3. Aiur Plateau 4. New Gettysburg 5. Annihilation Station 6. Gojira Greenhouse 7. Caldeum Plateau 8. Paladino Terminal 9. Flame Juggler 10. Shiva 11. Eris 12. Korhal Killzone 13. Frozen Zone 14. Namaste 15. Dasan Station
I took some time to rewatch some maps to get better impressions. Shoutout to Reddit user Utilael for sorting them out in a convenient way: + Show Spoiler +
Macro maps – this category is filled with strong maps and I like all of them, so any criticism here is a bit of nitpicking.
Annihilation Station – I like the vanilla feel of it, no gold mines, no watchtowers, no backdoors. I want to have one such map in a ladder pool where you can just play without gimmicks to the best of your abilities. Layout is really solid. Centre is the weak part of the map. Maybe making ramps smaller and pathway with sight blockers bigger could promote a more interesting dynamic of contention. And there was a bug when some doodads would cover air units partially. Apotheosis – unusual proportions do promote macro play. I love how the gold is positioned. Concerns that bridges would result in splitting the map seem unfounded. This map captured the idea of “macroness” the best from all contestants. Frozen Zone – maybe it’s 2-in-1 or really huge size but I can’t put a finger of how this map plays out, what are its main ideas, what are the main features of layout. It do seem to promote multipronged attacks and scrappy fights, which is a good thing. Galactic Process – the 3 base layout is really good on this map. However, besides that something seems wrong. The ideas (like border passage) are cool in theory but don’t glue into a solid map. Maybe some rework of corners could help.
Rush maps – I dislike the idea of a “rush map” in general: generally a map shouldn’t force you into a certain playstyle. Perhaps I’m biased to these maps because of it.
Korhal Killzone – this is probably my second least liked map. All options of third are just begging to be harassed in one way or another. It feels crowded – you are always near your opponent, a huge part of map is taken by unpathable elements. After breaking the rocks rush distance becomes intolerable. Namaste – this map suffers from “Ulrena layout”: close spawns + short rush distance makes half of a map useless. I’m not sure it’s salvageable. There are some nice features such as positions of golds but they can’t overcome initial problems. Paladino Terminal – this map has a weird base layout but it works in a good way enhancing gameplay. This is probably my favorite in this category. Why is it so dark though when you’re at least trying to make a contrast? Shiva – the preferable 3rds are too close and losing this base is losing the game. The alternative 3rds are too far away. Golds are useless. If you expand in different directions, it promotes circle syndrome. You can see I’m not a fan but pros liked it for whatever reason.
New maps – these category is a huge success. All the maps here are pushing the usual limits in a good way. I can see that none of them make the pool but making such maps is necessary and I would like to thank all mapmakers for trying.
Aiur Plateau – this map has a sick layout – it’s crazy but enjoyable. My main gripe is after you break all the rocks, the centre feels really bland. I’m afraid it’s closer to Korhal Carnage Knockout on the KCK to Moonlight Madness scale – meaning very few would play it both on ladder and in tournaments. Dasan Station – this map is a huge success. It gives that early WoL gameplay in LotV. If you’re set on making a rush map, it should be like this, where rush is not a choice but a necessity for BOTH sides. I’m not sure if it’s balanced but it is fun. Eris – this map wins “unusual layout” contest. I loved uThermal’s greed build, I loved how Scralett vs Bly played out due to expansion pattern. Corners may need some rework but I’m not sure what can make it better. Pros seemed to avoid it though which is a matter of concern. New Gettysburg – this map has achieved a great balance of everything. I would call it my favorite map in this contest BUT until Blizzard introduces air pathing, it’s a no-go. I hope this tournament would finally show them that air blockers are great and that coding air pathing is worth it. Come on, you already have everything for it; it can’t be that hard.
Gold maps – I feel this is a weak category because the initial conditions for it were poor. I hope there isn’t a requirement to take one of the maps from each category the pool – but I think there are arguments for considering to taking the maps on their merit. Let’s see how it plays out.
Caldeum Plateau – I’m afraid this map would favor Zerg taking gold as a natural. I’m also not sure about layout after the initial 4 bases. I think it captures the idea of “goldness” the best though and I would like to commend the author for trying to push the boundaries of standards. Flame Juggler – this is probably my favorite map in this category. I like the double main and I like gold placement. Top right corner seems like an afterthought though. Gojira Greenhouse – this is my least liked map in the whole contest. Gold walls are useless. Layout is unreasonably choky and less interesting than in any of macro maps. The only interesting thing is that gold mineral lines can be harassed through mineral wall but it’s not enough.
Decades ago, Valoril, a suburb of Augustgrad, the Capital City of Korhal was known as the one of the most peaceful places to visit. Terran all over the galaxy would vacation in this small city for relaxation, peace & tranquility. Wars waged on but the people of Valoril carried on life without any fear. All your problems, your anger, your worries, they seemed to fade away into non existence.
__________
Soon though, Augustgrad fell to the zerg, and with that, so did Valoril. The care-free lifestyle of those who lived and visited Valoril took a turn for the worse. Chaos took to the streets, no longer was there peace, but fear and destruction.
__________
Nobody saw it coming. How quickly a city of such peace can turn against each other. The loot, the torture, the killing. The city was abandoned. It was now just another afterthought to the wars waging through out the galaxy...
__________
Looking back at it all...It's crazy. How beautiful the city was. How peaceful it was. How it made all your problems go away.
__________
Now, take a deep breath and erase those memories you had in your head. That peace, that happiness, that tranquility...ignore it...
__________
Today we not only fight for glory, for honor, for fame, but we fight to reclaim that state of tranquility. Valoril will once again become the city where all our fears can fade away! Our problems disappear! Our dreams come true! Hold your arms up high my brethren, because today, the dominion takes back what was stolen from us!
__________
Today, blood will be shed!
Today, lives will be lost!
But most importantly...
Today, VALORIL REVIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________
__________
And so the story is told...will the zerg keep control of their conquered lands? Will a new player, in the protoss replace the zerg and rule these tranquil lands? Or will the Dominion, finally reclaim their Valoril? Whatever happens next...could be the final battle...in this...
Thanks to Basetrade TV for casting... Utilael for his awesome reddit post & youtube links... Neeb, MaSa, MaNa, Bunny, uThermal, Beastyqt, Nerchio & Lillekanin for playing my map... and all you die hard starcraft 2 fans for supporting us all!
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Lbg3pul.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DRK7wlG.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wyr7rHf.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/D80tBP1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TSQYyst.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/F6r1stJ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rOIkQWe.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mOckRg0.jpg)
