EPTthank you tl for lobbying blizzard for a better map pool to emerge
+ Show Spoiler +
one day
Teamliquid Map Contest 8 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Clarifications/Changes: Rush distance for Rush maps has been changed from "about 35-50 seconds" to "about 35 seconds". The definition of Macro map has been changed to: "A map that favors defensive play and encourages players to reach end game unit compositions." New Rule: You may use permanent neutral abilities onto all maps such as Force Field or Blinding Cloud. However, note that if these features cause performance issues on lower end computers, these maps may be edited or not considered for ladder. | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
thank you tl for lobbying blizzard for a better map pool to emerge + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On February 08 2017 07:13 Comedy wrote: overall it's sad that a website like TL.net, whos got years of experience in Sc2/bw, is encouraging of the blizzard school of thought that we need all these maps w/ weird concepts and experimental stuff. What we need is quality maps. Maps that are solid. Smooth and easy to play on for the people that are left on the ladder. None of this gimmicky shit like we've had in the map pool for the last couple of years. OverGrowth/DayBreak/Coda Etc .... more of this..... less of lurilek, ulrena, dasan station, this kind of garbage which is not fun to play on at all and for 95% of the time creates garbage games Overgrowth, Daybreak and Coda are basically the same map. They all give you the same kind of main, natural and third, and broadly the same paths to and from those bases, and all the general sizes and distances are similar. And we've been playing on all these maps for 5 years. You even have Bel'Shir Vestige and Cactus Valley in the pool right now. The real question is: why didn't we start experimenting sooner? On February 08 2017 07:11 Comedy wrote: please never rape everyone playing on medium settings and above ever again like you did with abyssal reef Please never make a post like this again. | ||
|
Comedy
469 Posts
On February 08 2017 07:50 NewSunshine wrote: Overgrowth, Daybreak and Coda are basically the same map. They all give you the same kind of main, natural and third, and broadly the same paths to and from those bases, and all the general sizes and distances are similar. And we've been playing on all these maps for 5 years. You even have Bel'Shir Vestige and Cactus Valley in the pool right now. The real question is: why didn't we start experimenting sooner? . Cactus valley is a 4 player map which has huge positional differences between spawning locations for example horizontal is super close distance and makes bases weird, vertical makes dropship play a lot better for terran. These are all things that increase randomness and overall makes the games worse quality, but that's besides the point. Yeah Coda, Overgrowth, Daybreak, are all very similar maps in concept. That's why they're the best maps. Everyone loves playing on these maps when they come back because they are smooth, easy to understand, and are solid. They dont include a whole bunch of randomness but instead let superior gameplay shine through because the map is less likely to fuck you over in some way. I've been around RTS games for a very long time, and for players that take the game serious it's extremely deterimental to have to play on maps with huge randomness. 4 player maps are the most obvious example, but all these weird maps that have been in lotv are the same. Super close rush distance, super weird base layouts, small chokes/paths etc. You might see the occasional gem of a game that's really unique and you haven't seen before (1 out of 500), but every gem, there's 1000's of really bad games that players have to deal with on ladder and in tournaments as well. Dasan, ulrena, lerilak crest, all super bad maps. It makes everyone massing games on the ladder have a super bad time, enjoy the game less, etc. It isn't good for the players, at all, especially the pro players who are looking for income from the game and consistency always helps the better players. So standard maps are really good for the most solid players which is good for the competitive scene etc plus as I've already mentioned it really brings forward gameplay. The game shouldnt need super gimmicky and bad maps to be interesting or different, the gameplay is what the game is all about and the best way to put gameplay on display is to use no BS maps. If you're bored of these maps, it's more likely you're just bored of Starcraft 2 in general. That's a shame, but not an arguement to make the people who still enjoy it have a worse time. It really hurts when people like yourself can't see this, and because you might not play 30 games a day because you're just a casual fan of the game, the people who play the most get actively hurt by having the either veto really bad maps or play a ton of low quality games on them :/ Also dude I'm super sorry that you can't understand that I'm dissappointed that I have to spend an entire season laddering on a map which literally makes my eyes bleed unless i tone my graphics all the way down. (Abyssal reef). If we can't rely on TL for quality I'm not sure where else we can go. To elaborate, the different catogeries alone are really quite worrisome - for standard macro maps they named 3 really bad ones and left out the standard macro maps I've mentioned. This would give people the wrong idea to create maps more like orbital, alterzim, and dusk towers (not good.) and less like overgrowth, daybreak, coda (good.) Every single other maps that get mentioned in the opening post by example literally should be examples of what NOT TO DO. They're so bad. The maps that came out of the last TLMC were a fucking disaster. These are all good maps : King Sejong (TOP.) Echo (very good). overgrowth coda Metalopolis no close pos Dual sight Antiga shipyard Cloud Kingdom Ohana Whirlwind (if we must accept that 4 player maps are part of a good map pool).| Star station Neo planet S( Not standard at all - but quite cool to play on). Polar Night Frost merry go round (quite a pleasure to play on!) Catallena frozen temple Where do these maps fit in the catogeries? Most of them do not. But these are some of the most enjoyable maps the game has produced. Why are we drifting into the crap catogery and need to go for more extremes and can't do more of what's already been proven to be fun to play on? Remember this article: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/507093-an-examination-of-the-history-of-the-map-pool Now it's this website encouraging people to make maps sticking to strange guidelines. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16061 Posts
On February 08 2017 07:17 The_Red_Viper wrote: Nah experimentation is good. I agree that most maps should be solid ones, but if that's all people ever care for we will never see new concepts which work as well. That's pretty boring tbh. Trying out new concepts is fine IF there are also a few solid macro maps. This time there's no category for a standard macro map since even the "macro" category needs to have an inbase natural for some weird reason. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
On February 08 2017 08:28 Comedy wrote:I've been around RTS games for a very long time, and for players that take the game serious it's extremely deterimental to have to play on maps with huge randomness. 4 player maps are the most obvious example, but all these weird maps that have been in lotv are the same. Super close rush distance, super weird base layouts, small chokes/paths etc. but 4p is the only random thing that you mentioned there. Everything else is just "thing I don't like so I'm chalking it up to randomness". Also to act like you're soo much more experienced with RTS games than all of us could possibly be (and that's why you know better) is more than a bit presumptious. I actually completely agree with you on the categories being kind of bad. I am probably the most experimental mapper in SC2, but I think we need a "standard" category, or the macro category should be expanded to include such maps. As I said in a previous post, these kinds of maps are necessary and probably 80%+ of maps made are standard-ish enough that they won't fit in the categories provided. It also dawned on me that Blizz is planning to keep a handful of maps from your sacred list around all the time as the "standard" maps and hence they only want different maps to come from the contest. Which would explain things. We shall see I guess. I will point out that your planet s description is a little ironic "Neo planet S( Not standard at all - but quite cool to play on)." You don't want people experimenting at all but you're praising a map that would have never been made if the mapmaker didn't experiment. o_O | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On February 08 2017 08:28 Comedy wrote: eah Coda, Overgrowth, Daybreak, are all very similar maps in concept. That's why they're the best maps. Everyone loves playing on these maps when they come back because they are smooth, easy to understand, and are solid. They dont include a whole bunch of randomness but instead let superior gameplay shine through because the map is less likely to fuck you over in some way. I've been around RTS games for a very long time, and for players that take the game serious it's extremely deterimental to have to play on maps with huge randomness. 4 player maps are the most obvious example, but all these weird maps that have been in lotv are the same. Super close rush distance, super weird base layouts, small chokes/paths etc. There's nothing random about a different kind of map. A map like Dasan Station has literally nothing random to it, because SC2 has no random mechanics in itself. You're just lumping things you happen not to like in the "random" category, and as such I'm not going to argue with you on that. I'm here for productive discussion at all times. Popping in, trashing the TLMC and Team Liquid as a result, saying "I've played a lot of RTS games, so trust me when I say everyone wants nothing but the same maps", these are not productive discussion. Figure out what you want to say and say it, spewing baseless claims and vitriol does not impress me. Also, you praise, among others, maps like King Sejong Station, which at the time was one of the most experimental maps in any map pool. All in a post designed to bash experimentation. I'll leave that there. On February 08 2017 08:28 Comedy wrote: Also dude I'm super sorry that you can't understand that I'm dissappointed that I have to spend an entire season laddering on a map which literally makes my eyes bleed unless i tone my graphics all the way down. (Abyssal reef). No need to condescend. I understand that you can be disappointed with the graphics on a map, but the way you said it makes you sound like a 9 year old who just wants to bitch. Let me show you what you said, this gem you gave us: On February 08 2017 07:11 Comedy wrote: please never rape everyone playing on medium settings and above ever again like you did with abyssal reef He wasn't even talking to you. Do better, or shut up. Also, you felt the need to come into this thread and bitch about the maps that are gonna come out of this contest, as though you know what I and everyone else are working on. Either you're clairvoyant, or supremely arrogant, and in either case I'm amazed. Amazed that you don't have anything better to do. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
On February 08 2017 12:55 Fatam wrote: but 4p is the only random thing that you mentioned there. Everything else is just "thing I don't like so I'm chalking it up to randomness". Also to act like you're soo much more experienced with RTS games than all of us could possibly be (and that's why you know better) is more than a bit presumptious. I actually completely agree with you on the categories being kind of bad. I am probably the most experimental mapper in SC2, but I think we need a "standard" category, or the macro category should be expanded to include such maps. As I said in a previous post, these kinds of maps are necessary and probably 80%+ of maps made are standard-ish enough that they won't fit in the categories provided. It also dawned on me that Blizz is planning to keep a handful of maps from your sacred list around all the time as the "standard" maps and hence they only want different maps to come from the contest. Which would explain things. We shall see I guess. I will point out that your planet s description is a little ironic "Neo planet S( Not standard at all - but quite cool to play on)." You don't want people experimenting at all but you're praising a map that would have never been made if the mapmaker didn't experiment. o_O hahahahahazhahahahahahahaha .. thank you for entertainment ahahahahahahahahahahaha comedy is conceited and you are not? hahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha so funny how the more things change the more they stay the same this attitude, both his and yours are what has made this sub forum what it is... what is it? all bitching and no substance User was warned for this post | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
| ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
(Yup, much easier to throw a random idea than actually thinking about it and spend the following hours to try and make anything out of it :D) | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On February 09 2017 00:12 AbouSV wrote: How about a map built around a single (larger) gold base that can be taken from both side, same idea as Terraform, but with same revenue in both case (and with like one geyser on each side)? (Yup, much easier to throw a random idea than actually thinking about it and spend the following hours to try and make anything out of it :D) Golds in the perfect middle of the map are typically only taken by players with already overwhelming leads, so I'm not sure about building a map around the idea. There might be a way to work it out, but I find the concept doubtful. | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On February 08 2017 07:49 fluidrone wrote: tlmc hype <3 <3 <3 thank you tl for lobbying blizzard for a better map pool to emerge + Show Spoiler + one day yes, not like most maps in this map pool and previous ones came from TLMC already  and it didn't seem that last winner had much popularity in the end, people even rioted to not have it again in this season's map pool. | ||
|
Comedy
469 Posts
Especially the part where appareantly a standard macro map needs an in-game base and 2 options to expand really irks me. This is something that started with orbital shipyard and it isn't good. These maps may lead to macro styles but making a macro map does absolutely not need this requirement. Some of the best macro maps infact do not have it. We've been playing on macro maps since 2011, not since Orbital shipyards. Quality of maps took an enormous dive with the foxtrot/deadwing WCS season 3 2014 map pool. Never forget Polt vs Hydra on Secret Spring game 7 to decide it all in WCS 2015 season 1. The purpose of a TL map contest is supposed to do the scene & maps good, not continue down the same downward spiral of less quality that blizzards map decision making has put us on. Yeah, some really good maps could still come out of it, but these catogeries make that a lot more difficult than it should be. Every single map named as an example/guideline in the OP is amongst my least favourite maps I've had to play on these last few years, with the solo exception of dusk towers. | ||
|
Avexyli
United States704 Posts
I don't like it either, or the requirement. I'm not even sure if it is an actual requirement, since I know many of us mappers dislike inbase nats to the point were most of our macro maps don't even have them. | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
 are not all showing their support to the tlmc#? Again i really need someone to tell me i'm wrong! and why? + Show Spoiler + i don't mean to say: post here and type "ave maria" to any particular thing .. just "be here" with a post.. (tl is proposing guidelines obviously that blizzard has asked for   ).. not type a particularly long post (maybe a one minute of support is a decent start) people posting instead of lurking ..posting whatever they know / feel / resent / think! ..just type what they want to say.. about OUR map pool. Why even be offensive? if you must go beyond the 66 characters.. propose ideas (indeed on the tlmc goings on, if you are so inclined.. i am not  ) but type with an objective ahead at least and then let the chips fall where they may <3 Showing blizzard that if you are but one voice .. ..we are many. Showing blizzard you play sc2 .. you watch it ..care about this map pool! i mean even a post as simple as: "love the idea of tlmc, i want the map pool to be good and it could be improved a lot with more maps like "x" "y" or "z" This takes 1/3 minutes tops, yes even if that extra minute is in-deed to make an account, just to post here (disclaimer: + Show Spoiler + one must read the team liquid commandments to become a poster and therefore would know that your first post must be in the "first post" thread, that done (30sec) then you are free to go and post in the Team Liquid Map tournament thread and share, explore, discuss or just martyr!? ) .Just hundreds of posts like that would mean so much to the people doing the maps, rekindle their unfocused passion.. and in the end it would mean more maps that are worth playing on for hours in them <3  Am i stupid for hoping people would defend what is theirs by right? i mean .. for sure .. add drama and all matters of "whatever" you need in your post.. but post! Make charts .. make graphs .. link to a particular game on a particular map to then explain why you can play this over and over and why that happens over and over in the case on that particular map ..! Your post would mean great ideas unearthed through everyone's sharing, sharing with each other and inspiring mapmakers .. ..it would mean dropping blizzard a line on this auspicious occasion! edit/ps: i sure do hope we get a lot of eye candy and mapmakers post at least their best map in jpg form or better yet online <3 on bnet!Make the MAP pool great! take 27! Motor! Background....action! | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
On February 09 2017 00:51 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Golds in the perfect middle of the map are typically only taken by players with already overwhelming leads, so I'm not sure about building a map around the idea. There might be a way to work it out, but I find the concept doubtful. I think the only way to do something like that is to have the midway gold base as a "backdoor" passageway between the 2 mains in a mirrored setup, kind of like what shakuras plateau horizontal spawns was like before the newer version where the backdoor was removed. Even then it's problematic since it's way easier for Terran or Protoss to hold / control such an area than Zerg. Maybe you could make a map like this if you make the rest of the map very zerg-friendly | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
 | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On February 09 2017 05:31 Comedy wrote: So, any comments on why these map catogeries are so horrendously thought out and made? Can changes be made? Especially the part where appareantly a standard macro map needs an in-game base and 2 options to expand really irks me. This is something that started with orbital shipyard and it isn't good. These maps may lead to macro styles but making a macro map does absolutely not need this requirement. Some of the best macro maps infact do not have it. We've been playing on macro maps since 2011, not since Orbital shipyards. Quality of maps took an enormous dive with the foxtrot/deadwing WCS season 3 2014 map pool. Never forget Polt vs Hydra on Secret Spring game 7 to decide it all in WCS 2015 season 1. The purpose of a TL map contest is supposed to do the scene & maps good, not continue down the same downward spiral of less quality that blizzards map decision making has put us on. Yeah, some really good maps could still come out of it, but these catogeries make that a lot more difficult than it should be. Every single map named as an example/guideline in the OP is amongst my least favourite maps I've had to play on these last few years, with the solo exception of dusk towers. I can agree that the example maps aren't really stellar ones, and that the definition of a macro map raises one eyebrow for me, but I would not attribute your "downward spiral" to the mapmakers themselves, but to Blizzard. They're the ones encouraging certain kinds of map trends, and they're the ones who have the final say as to what makes ladder. In the case of my map, Galactic Process, I didn't even have the final say as to what rocks got to stay on the map. The best the judges can do is pick the best maps, and there aren't as many of those as you'd think. It's a different time for SC2 than when the community first rose. | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
On February 09 2017 09:20 IronManSC wrote: Well i've decided to submit a map. It's my only map right now, but I'll give it a whirl. Buuut I gotta re-work the textures Shoot me a pm if you want help / if you want me to do something with your textures (something that YOU want! promise!) you do the map layout and doodads and whatever else.. i'll do what you don't want to do i suppose what you want is some energy to do it.. (and i think i can provide that, on skype or other dish da cord platform, for you ).. but just in case you actually want someone else to do it, i propose my aid: If i am right, you want a texture rendering/painting/theme and lighting that is an overall layout texture done from scratch that makes your map 1/display its layout so no one can say "they don't get it" 2/show you just how far the rabbit hole goes (+ Show Spoiler + when you describe what you want and i make it for you in 2 hours + Show Spoiler + then you can "finish it" the way you want for the next day(s) or even restart from scratch yourself with a clear view and how to execute it quickly / efficiently , no problemo for my ego, i'm just here to help and inspire you! 3/make it still beautiful / interesting after the "n"th viewing/game played on it If you win, we split the prize 20/80.. you take all the glory (i'll let you decide who gets the 20%  ) .. i'll take all your On February 09 2017 05:31 Comedy wrote: + Show Spoiler + So, any comments on why these map categories are so horrendously thought out and made? Can changes be made? Especially the part where apparently a standard macro map needs an in-game base and 2 options to expand really irks me. This is something that started with orbital shipyard and it isn't good. These maps may lead to macro styles but making a macro map does absolutely not need this requirement. Some of the best macro maps infact do not have it. We've been playing on macro maps since 2011, not since Orbital shipyards. Quality of maps took an enormous dive with the foxtrot/deadwing WCS season 3 2014 map pool. Never forget Polt vs Hydra on Secret Spring game 7 to decide it all in WCS 2015 season 1. The purpose of a TL map contest is supposed to do the scene & maps good, not continue down the same downward spiral of less quality that blizzards map decision making has put us on. Yeah, some really good maps could still come out of it, but these categories make that a lot more difficult than it should be. single map named as an example/guideline in the OP is among my least favorite maps I've had to play on these last few years, with the solo exception of dusk towers. On February 09 2017 12:55 NewSunshine wrote: .+ Show Spoiler + I can agree that the example maps aren't really stellar ones, and that the of a macro map raises one eyebrow for me, but I would not attribute your "downward spiral" to the mapmakers themselves, but to Blizzard. They're the ones encouraging certain kinds of map trends, and they're the ones who have the final say as to what makes ladder. In the case of my map, Galactic Process, I didn't even have the final say as to what rocks got to stay on the map. The best the judges can do is pick the best maps, and there aren't as many of those as you'd think. It's a different time for SC2 than when the community ps/edit: for anyone having any difficulty with their map, just shoot me a pm and i'll do my best to solve any tlmc map problems (actual technical problems in the editor / any graphic/specific data change / PR for showcasing your map / where to upload it easily .. etc) problems will be solved quick or declared "out of bounds" tlmc8 hype --- <3 tlmc8 hype --- <3 POST YOUR MAP --- <3 tlmc8 hype --- <3 IN THIS THREAD --- <3 tlmc8 hype --- <3 | ||
|
fluidrone
France1478 Posts
i will be on the chat pop up of the stream, i'll launch the video stream to showcase stuff (answers/concerns, whatever/something in the editor) or when i play arcade games (photon cycles or more likely my own maps) or (why not?) playtesting YOUR map with you or watching some people play it and discussing stuff about it! Why stream?/ be on a chat pop up/out? Mostly because it then shows when/if i'm online/available to help (for any map / map editor questions / or just to hang out and talk about maps/galaxies) If anyone wants to join, be my guest, it is guaranteed all free (+ Show Spoiler + mmm more like prepaid no? .. more like that 's on your end! .. i ain't getting a cut of that money .. so ... i'll be on every day/night today .. friday saturday / sunday (not sunday night though) (of course i'll have chores to do, but i'll be out an hour or two per day) So if you need help/inspiration, you know where to find me shoot me + Show Spoiler + a pm for particulars / me on twitch : houndofbaskerville | ||
| ||
