EPTTLMC7 Voting - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Make sure to comment in this thread for your vote to count! | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
| ||
|
AdrianHealeyy
114 Posts
 | ||
|
Meerel
Germany713 Posts
| ||
|
invisigoat
184 Posts
| ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
| ||
|
GooCat
1 Post
| ||
monk
United States8476 Posts
On June 07 2016 10:01 AdrianHealeyy wrote: Is there a recommended game list from the basetrade tv tournament? Much appreciated. Bly vs Scarlett on Eris Harstem vs Puck on Auir Plateau Beastyqt vs Lambo on New Gettysberg | ||
|
lord_nibbler
Germany591 Posts
If you can add and remove expansions or even a whole half of a map, what is the point of the finalist selection process? At this point, just nominate your favorite map makers already, let them show you their recent rough ideas and assign them the job. You can not have it both ways. Judge the maps and let the winners change everything about these maps. Either the map maker has a clear concept of his work, that he can be judged on. Or he is able to replace the core erratically, which is kind of proof that the first version did not have a real concept to begin with... | ||
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
Galactic Process Eris Shiva New Gettysburg Korhal Killzone in that order | ||
|
SC2Sole1
2 Posts
| ||
|
EleMenTfiNi
Canada107 Posts
| ||
|
Avexyli
United States702 Posts
On June 07 2016 11:01 lord_nibbler wrote: I find it borderline disqualifying how Namaste and Caldeum Plateau are only similar in name to their old version. If you can add and remove expansions or even a whole half of a map, what is the point of the finalist selection process? At this point, just nominate your favorite map makers already, let them show you their recent rough ideas and assign them the job. You can not have it both ways. Judge the maps and let the winners change everything about these maps. Either the map maker has a clear concept of his work, that he can be judged on. Or he is able to replace the core erratically, which is kind of proof that the first version did not have a real concept to begin with... The literal point of the iteration phase is to make changes to the maps according to feedback. I got alot of feedback that did nothing but make the map better. If you want I can send you the old, worse Namaste, and have that get to ladder instead? No, you should be given the best version possible. Else there is absolutely no purpose to having an iteration phase except for some bug fixes, which would happen on the way to Blizzard anyway. If there was an iteration phase for the Blizzard submission, you'd have Invader II, a much better map, than the one now. | ||
|
DisReSpeCTsc2
United States44 Posts
| ||
|
TeRTiuM
United States4 Posts
| ||
|
lord_nibbler
Germany591 Posts
On June 07 2016 11:17 Avexyli wrote: The thing is, once you allow the finalist to drastically change their maps in order "to get the best possible ladder map", you undermine the whole contest!The literal point of the iteration phase is to make changes to the maps according to feedback. I got alot of feedback that did nothing but make the map better. If you want I can send you the old, worse Namaste, and have that get to ladder instead? No, you should be given the best version possible. Else there is absolutely no purpose to having an iteration phase except for some bug fixes, which would happen on the way to Blizzard anyway. If there was an iteration phase for the Blizzard submission, you'd have Invader II, a much better map, than the one now. See, it might be hard to accept, but a contest is different to a contract work. Ultimately they aim for different outcomes! The contest wants to provide equal opportunity, a fair and open process and sustained interest in the contest itself. The selection of maps for ladder is only a byproduct of the contest! It is not even a question, the selection process does not need to be fair or open in any way. I know you are personally involved and all, but in the interest of fairness, they should have told you "Sorry, but changing 90% of your map is unacceptable. You will have to enter the 2.0 version in the next competition. But maybe you are lucky and Blizzard selects your old version anyway." | ||
|
Adelull
39 Posts
| ||
|
Auex
1 Post
| ||
|
Avexyli
United States702 Posts
On June 07 2016 11:47 lord_nibbler wrote: The thing is, once you allow the finalist to drastically change their maps in order "to get the best possible ladder map", you undermine the whole contest! See, it might be hard to accept, but a contest is different to a contract work. Ultimately they aim for different outcomes! The contest wants to provide equal opportunity, a fair and open process and sustained interest in the contest itself. The selection of maps for ladder is only a byproduct of the contest! It is not even a question, the selection process does not need to be fair or open in any way. I know you are personally involved and all, but in the interest of fairness, they should have told you "Sorry, but changing 90% of your map is unacceptable. You will have to enter the 2.0 version in the next competition. But maybe you are lucky and Blizzard selects your old version anyway." I don't understand your direction. How can the intentions of the contest, undermine itself? And how do you specify the "core" of the map, it's super subjective. There is equal opportunity amongst all mappers to make drastic or little changes. I was forunate to have three maps in the finals, and for those who follow me often, know that I am a fan of making drastic changes to benefit gameplay or balance. Originally I didn't even make drastic changes to Namaste, these changes came from the coordination of other mapmakers (who I'll leave unnamed until after the process is over), professional players and feedback from many different parts of the community. All these changes were positive. Was Namaste a bad map originally? No, not really. Just needed fixes. And, if you have mapped before, you would know that sometimes you just cant make a simple change without completely breaking everything. So you make changes elsewhere to fix that break, then another, and another, etc. You should always be striving to make the best out of your map, no matter what. It's why I continued to work on Invader and poke Blizzard to try it out. I would personally rather not have Namaste 1.0 go through, have people extremely frustrated at Blizzard, Me, and TeamLiquid for not allowing me to have an updated or better version. I really fail to see how this is negative or hurts the integrity of the contest. | ||
|
Trozz
Canada3456 Posts
I like these latest entrees. Some fine work, mappers. | ||
|
Adept
United States472 Posts
| ||
| ||
