EPTEdit: i wonder if someone even played "BANDARLOG RUINS". Your main is literally mined out after a few minutes. The map is unplayable.
It's a huge macro map, but you simply don't have the ressources to play anything related to "macro".
Teamliquid Map Contest 8 Results - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
StraKo
Germany96 Posts
Edit: i wonder if someone even played "BANDARLOG RUINS". Your main is literally mined out after a few minutes. The map is unplayable. It's a huge macro map, but you simply don't have the ressources to play anything related to "macro". | ||
|
PengWin_SC
Switzerland433 Posts
On February 20 2017 21:50 StraKo wrote: i just wanted a classic macro map like akilon waste or coda :/ Edit: i wonder if someone even played "BANDARLOG RUINS". You're main is literally mined out after a few minutes. The map is unplayable. It's a huge macro map, but you simply don't have the ressources to play anything related to "macro". I disagree with the caveat that horizontal spawns should be disabled. I think in that scenario, enough bases are accessible to play it out. I also think that the idea is cool, and maybe with some number tweaking on the minerals, it can be a really cool experiment to see how it plays out. | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
| ||
|
Samro225am
Germany982 Posts
On February 20 2017 21:50 StraKo wrote: i just wanted a classic macro map like akilon waste or coda :/ Edit: i wonder if someone even played "BANDARLOG RUINS". You're main is literally mined out after a few minutes. The map is unplayable. It's a huge macro map, but you simply don't have the ressources to play anything related to "macro". The map was entered in the 'experimental'-category. It totally changes what is thinkable as an early game. As the author of the map i want to quickly sketch out my ideas behind this: 4spawn maps are either huge with basically free bases or have too short rush distances. When this TLMC opened up the possibility to tweak the resources I came up with the following concept: - 4 spawn map with acceptable distances, but good possibilities for rushing when in vertical or horizontal spawn - low eco main, mid eco nat, regular eco thirds and then golds to favor quick expansion - players will have fewer resources to reach a mid game - gamble-situation when player decide for the timing-attack, because more bases mean a much bigger economical edge, when the aggressive player mines out very fast - economy LotV does not favor players who expand further than 3-4bases (at a time). I wanted to create a map the stretches the players out more, basically they want to expand fast and possibly overextend - scouting time window is smaller in LotV than ever before, this is an issue on 4 spawn maps and the low eco main is a reaction to this I do not say that the low eco situation creates macro games even on short rush distance spawns, but I am happy to see the judges are willing to see this play out. It is an experimental map and I think there are quite some people who are interested to see what such a radical intervention in LotV-economy will do to the early game and how player deal with it. On February 20 2017 21:58 PengWin_SC wrote: I disagree with the caveat that horizontal spawns should be disabled. I think in that scenario, enough bases are accessible to play it out. I also think that the idea is cool, and maybe with some number tweaking on the minerals, it can be a really cool experiment to see how it plays out. I am open for any input on how the minerals should be set. since this is an experiment really I went with rather large steps also to make the concept clear and visible. edit: although it is a large map it is not overly huge in vertical spawn positions especially. It is rather a question of scouting. | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On February 20 2017 22:07 Samro225am wrote: The map was entered in the 'experimental'-category. It totally changes what is thinkable as an early game. As the author of the map i want to quickly sketch out my ideas behind this: 4spawn maps are either huge with basically free bases or have too short rush distances. When this TLMC opened up the possibility to tweak the resources I came up with the following concept: - 4 spawn map with acceptable distances, but good possibilities for rushing when in vertical or horizontal spawn - low eco main, mid eco nat, regular eco thirds and then golds to favor quick expansion - players will have fewer resources to reach a mid game - gamble-situation when player decide for the timing-attack, because more bases mean a much bigger economical edge, when the aggressive player mines out very fast - economy LotV does not favor players who expand further than 3-4bases (at a time). I wanted to create a map the stretches the players out more, basically they want to expand fast and possibly overextend - scouting time window is smaller in LotV than ever before, this is an issue on 4 spawn maps and the low eco main is a reaction to this I do not say that the low eco situation creates macro games even on short rush distance spawns, but I am happy to see the judges are willing to see this play out. It is an experimental map and I think there are quite some people who are interested to see what such a radical intervention in LotV-economy will do to the early game and how player deal with it. I am open for any input on how the minerals should be set. since this is an experiment really I went with rather large steps also to make the concept clear and visible. edit: although it is a large map it is not overly huge in vertical spawn positions especially. It is rather a question of scouting. Might be beneficial to maynard 8 workers to the nat when it finishes, contrary to literally every other map, then? If your main has a small amount of available minerals, it seems to me you'd want to stretch those out so you don't end up with redundant workers. Should slow down the mining out speed, which he was originally complaining about. | ||
|
PengWin_SC
Switzerland433 Posts
On February 20 2017 22:07 Samro225am wrote: The map was entered in the 'experimental'-category. It totally changes what is thinkable as an early game. As the author of the map i want to quickly sketch out my ideas behind this: 4spawn maps are either huge with basically free bases or have too short rush distances. When this TLMC opened up the possibility to tweak the resources I came up with the following concept: - 4 spawn map with acceptable distances, but good possibilities for rushing when in vertical or horizontal spawn - low eco main, mid eco nat, regular eco thirds and then golds to favor quick expansion - players will have fewer resources to reach a mid game - gamble-situation when player decide for the timing-attack, because more bases mean a much bigger economical edge, when the aggressive player mines out very fast - economy LotV does not favor players who expand further than 3-4bases (at a time). I wanted to create a map the stretches the players out more, basically they want to expand fast and possibly overextend - scouting time window is smaller in LotV than ever before, this is an issue on 4 spawn maps and the low eco main is a reaction to this I do not say that the low eco situation creates macro games even on short rush distance spawns, but I am happy to see the judges are willing to see this play out. It is an experimental map and I think there are quite some people who are interested to see what such a radical intervention in LotV-economy will do to the early game and how player deal with it. I am open for any input on how the minerals should be set. since this is an experiment really I went with rather large steps also to make the concept clear and visible. edit: although it is a large map it is not overly huge in vertical spawn positions especially. It is rather a question of scouting. First off, love the map. One of my favorite concepts. Regarding the mineral numbers, I think we'll have to see how the TLMC games on it go to judge whether it's good or whether it needs a slight increase. My biggest note is that I think horizontal spawn should be removed, purely because in maps with a *somewhat* similar layout of bases, horizontal tends to be very difficult to play since you'll be a little pressed to expand towards your opponent past the fourth base, and obviously more expansions is the entire point of this map. | ||
|
MarinePrince
United States101 Posts
| ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
On February 20 2017 22:22 MarinePrince wrote: A lot of them look like a lot of fun. Too bad Blizzard won't actually use any of these... I'm guessing you're new here, or you're just saying the maps are so bad blizzard wouldn't use them. Blizzard oversees the TLMC. They sponsor it. They pick maps from the contest and see if any are worthy of ladder. There's been a good chunk of TLMC finalists over the years that have made ladder. | ||
|
Broodie
Canada832 Posts
come on Timmay lol I do stand with many of the opinions here on snubbed maps, I think they were snubbed because of the time limits given, even pengwin says that the maps chosen need to be played on in the tournament to see how they work. I want to ask, how was the timeline of this entire event actually given to the TL team? Did you get 1 week to design/organize the event, 1 week to get maps in? Are any of the judges map makers themselves? I feel like this information mightve been handy to teamliquid staff before Christmas even, so why the short and seemingly careless time line on actually going through the maps? Or are we all wrong? + Show Spoiler + On February 20 2017 19:01 paralleluniverse wrote: + Show Spoiler +I like Acolyte (the bush at the 3rd needs to be removed), Ascension to Aiur, Hwangsan, but these are all quite standard, and Hunger Game. Many of the better maps or more interesting maps got robbed such as Exosphere, Ophilia, Harmonize, Broken Earth, Aurora, Fridge, Dark Stone. phew, I had never before received such little community... "communitiness" (acknowledgement) about any of my creations in the past. I was about to go seppuku in a corner. Thank you for mentioning Ophilia, paralleluniverse. | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
Macro Acolyte: Solid 3 base setup. I think the inbase natural is a little weird with mineral placement and amount of space behind some of the minerals/gas. Can a siege tank hit the gas from the forward 4th? Can you blink across? If that's the case you'll probably want to always grab your forward 4th to help defend your inbase but then it's super easy to ping pong between the inbase & forward 4th when harassing. Expanding horizontally is the "safe" way imo as it does keep you farther back from your opponent although expect tons of attacks to focus your inbase natural to constantly force you to funnel through chokes & ramps & simcity to defend. Ascension to Aiur: My map, no comment. Enjoy friends! Asteroid Barricade: I remember talking to Negative about this map a little bit as he was working it up and the only thing I was really concerned with about this map was the amount of chokes. It's a big 2 player macro map but into every single base is basically a 2x wide ramp. There really isn't a whole ton of open space next to any of the base expansions for the most part which scares me. Stopping that 2 base tank marine push with access to the ramps & chokes and being able to lift from your forward 3rd to your main is scary scary scary. Also end game, zerg will have to focus on counter attacks 24/7 I believe since unless you're in a very few specific open spots it's going to be hard to engage. Hwangsan: Get rid of backdoor, win hearts of all! It's a good, solid macro map. Choice of 3rds makes it interesting, either 3rd leads to a good 4th. I know this map got a ton of testing before and I think it shows as there really aren't any glaring problems I see. Paradisia: My map, no comment. Enjoy friends! Windwalker: I think the map plays out pretty awesome if and only if you expand horizontally. I told Avex about this already as well so he knows my feelings on this. I feel unless you are going for a type of 3 base only mentallity you should always expand horizontally. Expanding vertically doesn't make sense since then grabbing a 4th is going to be soooo much more difficult. You either take the 4th that's at 3/9 positions with the super exposed minerals/gas or your take the one that hugs your main but now that spreads your army out super thin. I still thinking getting rid of highground section with the rocks/ramp would be better. You could then rework the vertical base, still have plenty of options but possible make it a little more viable to expand either way. Think you expand horizontally you get the 3rd that hugs your main, the 4th right up a ramp, a 5th that is protected by your 4th, then a 6th that's tucked away in the corner. It just flows a ton better imo. Rush Eremita: Super super super super short rush distance. Even building 3 rax reaper in your main base is basically still proxying since reapers are going to take about 5 seconds to get from your base to his (<3!). I also don't get the point of having the backdoor base only six minerals? It's already hard enough to expand on this map and now you're going to give a disadvantage to the person who expands by limiting his minerals? It's basically saying 1-base or die 24/7 on this map. Unless both players 1 base long enough they both mine out then any non-terran player gets screwed because they had to spend 400 minerals on a new base. Expanding forward for a natural is a death threat because you now have multiple attack paths (plus the backdoor still) but if you lose control of the watchtower it really sucks for you as pushes utilizing that path will be tough. Hunger Game: I think you're going to see protoss proxy all day every day on this map. Especially since you could proxy stargate anywhere in the backdoor and unless there is an overlord/reaper constantly patrolling that entire backdoor path you're shit outta luck since getting a non cliffwalk/flying unit back there is impossible. Protoss in general will be so abusive on this map between proxying, placing pylons behind mineral walls / on top of cliffs to warp in on the backdoor. Think about terran doing any type of drop. Hey, good luck defending your 3rd and your backdoor as I doomdrop all my marines/tanks on your forward 3rd then lift off and take out your backdoor. And yes, you're basically forced to take the backdoor natural as your natural in 100% of the games which means once you take a 3rd (if you even can) it will get abused hard. Maxwell Platform: Even though there are two entrances into the natural, I think with having the rocks it "should" be alright. Although, it does make me think zerg might early pool everygame against protoss just because I don't think they would be able to handle much early pressure because they wouldn't be able to take a set of rocks down fast enough and walling off both sides early isn't possible. I think this map would just play out better if you took out the middle spawn and just had it a two player map with the corner spawns. Also, the 2 & 8 bunch of bases is ridiculous. It's basically 3 bases behind two 2x ramps. Once you get one, you get them all! :D New Maps Paradise Lost: What is the point of ever getting an island base when you can grab 5 ground bases that are all extremely close to you and all 5 of those bases are in 1 choke. It's 5 ground base on almost a single choke? It's limited as hell in movement. Even all the ground bases are choked so hard because there are d-rocks at every single base. I suppose if you want skytoss to do even better than they are or terran to choke up the single ramp and parade push better than they are, then sure, this map does that. I don't get why you make a ton of easy to defend ground bases, then try to incorperate air blockers & 3 island bases". Do one or the other. Make it hard to expand unless you do islands. I drew up a design in your thread that I think would have made the map a ton better. Geumsangsan: I feel like this map doesn't do anything...new? And please don't tell me it's "new" because of forcefields. Change forcefields to destructible rocks and it's the same exact thing, only better because at least rocks don't care if you're terran, protoss or zerg. Your main minerals are super vulnerable. Your 3rd (assuming you can't take the inbase natural) is super wide open or super harassable and spreads you out far. To me this map seems like it was probably submit as a Macro/New and the only reason it got chosen was because there was already 6 better macro maps so let's throw it in "new" because it has forcefields. I do like the look of it with the orange/fall setting but between the forcefields, the exposed main minerals & the unsafe viable (non-inbase) 3rds makes me not really a fan. Sequencer: I think there are way too many rocks on this map. It's already super choked enough with all the ramps that I don't see the point in have almost any of the rocks besides the one that covers your 1/2 base and that is only because it then limits the chokes to your natural to 1. Terran are going to reign supreme on this map with tank/bio/widow mine. Can set up tanks almost anyplace to shell possible bases or to at least force you up ramps to defend. I think you're basically better off ignoring your 1/2 base and just expanding horizontally since it's all full bases and keeps you the farthest from your enemy. I worry about end game on this map as well since getting surrounds will be next to impossible and movement around the map will feel sluggish until you kill all the rocks (again, do they serve a purpose other than being annoying?) Can reapers get up next to the ramp by your 1/2 base? I don't have time to load the map up but that could be a major problem if they are since your entire main base is "reaper-able" and hiding extra proxy rax would be super easy on this map. Experimental Keres Passage: Some of the flow and movement around the map feels strange as you either go through the super choked off middle or have to swing all the way around bottom. I feel like mid game could be tough because you could see a lot of basetrade scenarios if one person is attack northern and the other goes southern. I think that's just the style of symmetry is hard to do though. Also, are the main/natural/full 3rd different in minerals/gas at all? Otherwise the only "resource experiment" is after 3 base economy? I mean, the majority of games don't go past 3 base economy so we'll almost never see any of the resource experimentation. I guess maybe someone could take a hidden gold possibly? Either way, with the limited movement/flow around the top & bottom sides and having almost no point taking any of the "1/2 or gold" bases until after 3 base I don't really care for this map that much. Bandarlog Ruins: I think you either see massive early cheese or you just see terran lifting to the 3rd to get that full base and just take the gold as their natural. Or lift to the 3rd that's vertical of them and then you only have to defend the ramp! (Plus a scouting unit would most likely scout every single base before realizing your not in either of the mains lol) I mean, you're basically spending a 1/4 of your main minerals to build a CC (exagerrating sure). Mineral fields are also super close to the edges of the map (either bounds or cliffs) which I dislike since it makes it harder to defend libs/drops/harass and makes it so you don't have many places to surround said drops or to place static d behind your minerals if needed. It is experimental though and I think it fits this category the best so even though I'm not a fan of it and if something like it did get ladder it'd just get veto'ed 100% of the time, I still think it's the best choice for this category. Blood Boil: First off, what is that, a map overview for ants? Doesn't this just map just heavily benefit the aggressive player since expanding forward you get full bases? Aka, Terran every game? I also just think the pathways around your main/nat/3rd/4th are just super super awkward and super choked off. You have the backdoor rock tower but if any toss/terran get back there you're screwed since it's a super choked off pathway and having the high ground advantage does nothing in sc2. Again, I don't have time to get in game and explore. It's just super hard to read this map from the overview alone, maybe from it being so tiny!  Also your natural placement is going to be very awkward movement with an army once you get that cc/hatch/nexus down because it'll block any type of concave you want to get from the backdoor. Honestly, the whole backdoor part of the map just boggles my mind and makes me dislike it. I feel the part with the rock tower, that pathway, you could just get rid of and then basically you're on 2 and 1/2 base under one choke, which...isn't bad at all, especially since there could still be plenty of harass. --- So, with all that said. Rush is definitely the weakest category by far. Like, all 3 of the rush maps, I don't like at all. Although it's probably me being a little more biased since I submit Boardwalk into new/rush and I feel it's a lot better than the other Rush maps!  Macro is definitely the strongest category, but that should be obvious since it's the most..err.."Standard" of maps.After I get out of work tonight maybe I'll list my favorite maps out of these 15 chosen. How I would rank these 15 against each other. We'll see! :D --- Huge shout out to blizzard for hosting this event but most importantly, Team Liquid for all the hard work you guys do. No matter what, people will disagree with maps and you guys put a shit ton of time and effort into this mapping community and I don't believe you get the respect you deserve. Thank you! Looking forward to TLMC9! =) | ||
|
gab12
Poland147 Posts
 ) awesome new idea on the maps and also the very cool map with islands is paradise lost, and really reminding of bw cool map on which i would love to ladder is sequencer | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On February 20 2017 22:58 Broodie wrote: phew, I had never before received such little community... "communitiness" (acknowledgement) about any of my creations in the past. I was about to go seppuku in a corner. Thank you for mentioning Ophilia, paralleluniverse. No problems. Ophilia is the most aesthetically appealing map in the contest. It's also got a really unique design with its expansion placement and the high ground protecting the natural. Should have definitely made it. | ||
|
Samro225am
Germany982 Posts
The map files for Asteroid Barricade and Bandarlog Ruins have problems like bad ramps and bad pathing. These issues were known earlier and changed over the weekend – and well in time before the results were published. Somehow the old files were still used and upload with the TLMC tag. Since I redid all ramps, fixed clipping issues, etc. and provided corrected files in time I want to ask everyone who wants to play these maps: please use my private uploads, not the ones that are tagged with TLMC. Information about the changes can be found in the according map threads. Bandarlog Ruins: battlenet:://starcraft/map/2/198473 edit: TLMC8 Bandarlog Ruins and TLMC8 Asteroid Barricade were updated after old files were used for the upload before. Apologies to all players from everyone involved and hf playing the maps. | ||
|
Insidioussc2
Germany96 Posts
It feels to me that you are judging books by their covers or decide oskar nominees by the quality of their trailers. By what Pengwin posted here and by some of saturday's games showing blatant issues, this impression doesn't seem too far off. I do appreciate you doing this contest, but it is a huge step backwards from tlmc 7. The macro maps look pretty solid and "Paradise Lost" + "Sequencer" are great as well (pretty standard though for being "new maps"). Would be a huge surprise if any of the top 5 won't be one of those 8 maps. | ||
|
Jealous
10179 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On February 20 2017 18:40 PengWin_SC wrote: I really appreciate you and Kantuva (on reddit) taking the time to have this kind of a debate. A fair bit of my experience with some mappers over the past year (most recently, Sunshine's not-so-veiled comment on the other thread saying that Avex and I are friends, Avex got 4 maps in, clearly rigged) has been insult ridden "arguments" rather than actual attempts to see each others' point of view. I think this kind of stuff is important and hopefully we can improve the format going forward. Edit: added a point about Boardwalk I want to apologize for that, I'm recognizing that I get emotional about the results of the TLMC, and as a result I want to find fault with whatever I can, but posts like that aren't doing me or anyone any favors. I agree about trying to move forward with more productive discussion. And I really appreciate the posts you've been making in this thread, having that kind of illumination on the judging process - though incomplete - is great. And though I have maps I personally would rather see as finalists, I can accept these results, and will simply try to do better next time. Sorry if I soured your impression of me or the community in any way. | ||
|
Solar424
United States4001 Posts
Walling off your natural on Hunger Game seems to be next to impossible. The 3 o'clock position on Maxwell Platform seems massively favored. It basically gets 4 bases that are further away from the opponent than the opponent's natural is from the 3 o'clock spawn. Once again, putting "Rush" as a category has produced terrible maps. Of course, one of these will make it in to the map pool because Blizzard only cares about excitement and game-ending damage and not actual skill. | ||
|
Vutalisk
United States680 Posts
I'm no expert on maps so I'm not gonna comment on the maps. However, I do feel the timing is a bit rush this time around. I wish we have started the competition sooner so mapmakers could have a bit more time to think over and get more feedbacks from community. I feel like the competition was just started yesterday or something and now we chose the finalists already. From a daily TL reader standpoint, I barely get to see all the maps, let alone anything else. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24211 Posts
On February 21 2017 02:45 Solar424 wrote: Eremita might actually be the worst map ever made. 12 pool drone rush every game Zerg is in. Walling off your natural on Hunger Game seems to be next to impossible. The 3 o'clock position on Maxwell Platform seems massively favored. It basically gets 4 bases that are further away from the opponent than the opponent's natural is from the 3 o'clock spawn. Once again, putting "Rush" as a category has produced terrible maps. Of course, one of these will make it in to the map pool because Blizzard only cares about excitement and game-ending damage and not actual skill. I think the rush category was bound to give terrible maps. I know some people actually enjoyed Ulrena but I really don't think this is a map category SC2 genuinely needs right now. And even if that's the case, aggressive maps are ok, rush maps where something built in your base is basically a standard map proxy are simply retarded. | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/e4LKbAB.jpg) There's a neutral supply depot. Rush distance is small, but I assume you all know how to wall? | ||
| ||
