TLMC8 comes to a close as we round out the top five maps of the season as determined by you, the community. TLMC8 was the closest vote we've ever had in a map contest with the top five being neck-and-neck up until the very end. The final five maps are all very high quality and each could serve as a valued addition to the ladder map pool. As always, Blizzard will consider all of the finalists for use on the ladder but there are no guarantees that first place (or second... etc) is used!
Prizing
All finalists will receive a custom community commander portrait. In addition, the authors of the top five maps will receive the following prizes, all provided by Blizzard.
First - $1,000 Second - $500 Third - $250 Fourth - $150 Fifth - $100
Winners
FIFTH PLACE
Sequencer | NegativeZero
This medium-sized macro map features a grid of alternating high ground pods, inspired by the BW proleague map "Geometry", encouraging players to use them to establish defensive positions. Destructible rocks initially block several paths and make certain bases easier to take. But once the rocks are down, despite the map's constricting appearance, it becomes quite open - since the pods are so close together, it's easy to move between adjacent pods to flank from a side ramp, and numerous possible routes are available to traverse the map.
The map offers 2 choices of 3rd base: a standard, fairly vulnerable base on the low ground, and a protected base located behind the natural wall, but with a reduced resource count of only 6 mineral nodes and 1 geyser.
Multiple alternating high ground pods allow for defensive positioning as well as flanking and outmaneuvering.
NegativeZero is most known for creating TLMC6 winner Terraform and TLMC7 2nd place finisher Apotheosis. NegativeZero will take fifth place with $100.
FOURTH PLACE
Paradise Lost | Jacky
There are three island expansions near each player's main.
This map utilizes 'Sky Gates', which are like Destructible Rocks with 2000HP and 3 armor. However, they block air units as well.
Air Blockers block the area around the islands, and is marked in blue.
The first island expansion can be easily defended by building a defensive tower(such as Missle Turret) on the side of the main base, but more island bases requires a larger defensive radius.
Jacky is known for numerous maps throughout the history of StarCraft II including Crossfire, Xel'Naga Fortress, Crevasse, and Calm before the Storm. More recently, however, he won TLMC7 with the map New Gettysberg. Jacky takes home $150 this time for his creative map.
THIRD PLACE
Hwangsan | Avex
A small channel runs through the center of the map, guarded by Watch Towers from the cliffs above. Third bases are open to offensive strikes, but defendable through tight positions, some of which that can be opened up.
Standard rush distance, boundary size and mineral lines, with little deviation from the norm in macro maps.
Round in shape, double rocks blocking two offensive channels by the diagonal third base, a rock tower to help assist in the vertical base defense.
Avex is most known for the ladder map Invader. Avex also placed 5th in TLMC7 with his entry, Gojira Greenhouse. Avex will be taking home at least $250 for his efforts here.
SECOND PLACE
Ascension to Aiur | SidiantheBard
Fairly standard macro map with plenty of choices of expansions after the natural. No matter where you take your 3rd, you will have an option of a different 4th as well. The game will constantly evolve depending which 3rd gets taken because then it opens up multiple different options for a 4th.
Expanding both vertically and horizontally has their individual benefits.
Early game the rocks play a huge role, choking the map off and restricting flow but come middle and end game once they are taken down it creates another (albeit choked) path for the attacker to get around the map.
The middle of the map is quite choked off, but out of each choke gives a good defender's advantage if needed.
Watchtowers see the entire middle forcing players to hug the outside paths if they want to stay clear of vision.
Sidian's long list of previous ladder maps include: Habitation Station(2nd place TLMC3) , Abyssal Reef, Honorgrounds, Moonlight Madness(5th place TLMC6), and Korhal Carnage Knockout. Sidian will take home $500 for yet another 2nd place finish.
FIRST PLACE
Windwaker | Avex
A warm and inviting beach-front macro map.
Standard rush distance, comfortable elevation variation. Many positional points, but enough space for flanking in specific matchups, such as Zerg versus Terran or Protoss versus Terran.
Vertical 4th has a high mineral income, but little longevity, as well as only one geyser. The opposite 4th, has 10 minerals and 2 gas geysers, for longevity.
Lowground late-game bases have 5 mineral patches, but 3 geysers as a risky base option after the longevity base was taken.
The Gold base has 8 mineral patches, all of which at a 33% decreased value (1000 for near, 600 for far patches)
In addition to his 3rd place prize, Avex will take home $1,000 more for his victory in TLMC8.
See you next season!
With that, TLMC8 comes to a close. Thank you to everyone who submitted a map, voted in the poll, watch the Map Test tournament hosted by BaseTradeTV or otherwise showed an interest in the contest.
Now that the contest has concluded, it's in Blizzard's hands to pick the maps for the next season of ladder. We look forward to hear which of the fifteen finalists will make it!
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
congratulations to all winners.. really awesome maps.. but I think you mixed up the 3rd and 4th place (at least in the list at the end they are reversed)
These look pretty good! A little sad that Acolyte didn't make it, I liked the look of it. Paradise Lost, with all due respect, would be an incredibly frustrating map to play on. Skytoss turtle every game.
Great map from SidiantheBard once again. And a big congratulation to all of the winners! Here's hoping for sweet new maps for the next season of ladder!
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
You disappoint me, TL community, did you forget to be elitists?
Asteroid Barricade and Sequencer were robbed a bit IMO (Asteroid especially at #9 - WTF community). Winners are pretty solid maps though, so can't complain 100%. Grats AVEX on all your spoils
Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
People have work I think (about to head off there myself). Give people time to come home and settle in, you'll get your salt posts yet
On March 10 2017 23:29 Fatam wrote: Asteroid Barricade and Sequencer were robbed a bit IMO (Asteroid especially at #9 - WTF community). Winners are pretty solid maps though, so can't complain 100%. Grats AVEX on all your spoils
Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
People have work I think (about to head off there myself). Give people time to come home and settle in, you'll get your salt posts yet
Agreed, Asteroid Barricade and Sequencer were my favorites too.
i think windwaker would be much much better without the water. I'd make the terrain just flat so that you can place buildings there and also spot burrowed stuff more easy.
Congrats to the other winners! Hope people enjoyed playing and watching games on Ascension to Aiur. I'll be curious to see which of the 15 maps Blizzard ends up picking up for ladder.
Cheers to Blizzard for supporting the mapping community and a huge shout out to Team Liquid for all their hard work and their countless hours judging, setting up tournaments and organizing everything. Thank you!! =)
Not really happy but not 2 suprised bout the Results.
Windwaker, Ascenscion to Aiur and Sequenzer are good choices.
BUT
Paradise Lost: Is an as said TURTLE HEAVY map, with less airspace and well defendable islands. A nice great macro map which i prefer but a map like pardisia would be way better cause of the available airspace. So this map is kinda unplayable to me. But an interessting design anyways appreciate that!
Hwangsan: solid map yes, but a map for hots. So kinda the same to me as Paradise lost and not playable. Why? This map has only 6 mineral patches which is to me way less. Its like the same on belshir and belshir is a hots map, also sad we still have old maps in the pool but whatever. I cant see long games happening here cause there isnt even a chance to get in a stabile long game. Players are forced to end the game quickly without expanding 2 much. This maps seems to me just outdated and i really really hope blizzard is able to see that and dont let her pass into the Ladder pool.
Overall a good mappool just Hwangsan is kinda fail at this point to me.
Congrats to the winners awesome work anyways and thanks for the possibilty to vote.
A bit sad people always just seem to vote for the big macro maps, almost all of these maps are too big for proper competitive play, only Hwangsan seems to be suited for the ladder.
On March 11 2017 01:00 uThermal wrote: A bit sad people always just seem to vote for the big macro maps, almost all of these maps are too big for proper competitive play, only Hwangsan seems to be suited for the ladder.
On March 11 2017 00:56 terrafreako wrote: Not really happy but not 2 suprised bout the Results.
Windwaker, Ascenscion to Aiur and Sequenzer are good choices.
BUT
Paradise Lost: Is an as said TURTLE HEAVY map, with less airspace and well defendable islands. A nice great macro map which i prefer but a map like pardisia would be way better cause of the available airspace. So this map is kinda unplayable to me. But an interessting design anyways appreciate that!
Hwangsan: solid map yes, but a map for hots. So kinda the same to me as Paradise lost and not playable. Why? This map has only 6 mineral patches which is to me way less. Its like the same on belshir and belshir is a hots map, also sad we still have old maps in the pool but whatever. I cant see long games happening here cause there isnt even a chance to get in a stabile long game. Players are forced to end the game quickly without expanding 2 much. This maps seems to me just outdated and i really really hope blizzard is able to see that and dont let her pass into the Ladder pool.
Overall a good mappool just Hwangsan is kinda fail at this point to me.
Congrats to the winners awesome work anyways and thanks for the possibilty to vote.
Hwangsan has the same amount of bases as Daybreak and on Daybreak long macro games were the norm - even in LotV. 12 bases are more than enough to play long macro games. Also how many games do you see where players take more than 6 bases? it's a very small percentage.
1. If you start bottom right, the base LEFT to the mainbase has 11 mineral patches and you can't properly place a base there, because of misplaced mineral patches.
2. The equivalent base in the top has only 10 mineral patches.
3. Both gold bases have the same placement issue, mineralpatches need to get readjusted.
Personal request:
Please remove the water. You can't build anything there and makes burrowed units impossible to spot if you play on low settings. This is a strong tactical disadvantage for players with weaker PC's or who like to play on low settings for improved performance. For some reason you're able to build on Hwangsan's water.
Also the map is medium sized, but there's actually very little space to place macro CC's etc... So please, remove the water and just make it flat terrain.
It would be nice to be able to place turrets/cannons/PF's/etc everywhere the player wants to do. If i want to play mech, i'd like to be able to wall off my possible 4th with macro CC's for example.
I think most proffessional players would agree with me, so maybe you could take this into consideration.
For me personally Paradise lost is an absolute no-go map. I will veto it 100%.
I think except for pocket naturals, there shouldn't be any maps in a ladder/tournament mappool who feature bases that can't get attacked directly.
I think it's terrible map design and restricts strategic and tactical options, it also favors races over others. Even though new gettysburg was zerg favored, i still had some really good games on it, except when someone got the island bases. This just killed the map for me. Air blockers shouldn't exist in competetive maps and especially no excessive amount of island bases.
On March 11 2017 01:00 uThermal wrote: A bit sad people always just seem to vote for the big macro maps, almost all of these maps are too big for proper competitive play, only Hwangsan seems to be suited for the ladder.
Oh well, congrats to the winners ^_^
It is true the public will usually always vote for the bigger standard macro maps for the most part. It's why one of my submissions was a fairly safe, standard macro map. With that said, I'd love to hear your thoughts on why Ascension to Aiur isn't suited for ladder though, even a PM if you'd prefer.
On March 11 2017 01:00 uThermal wrote: A bit sad people always just seem to vote for the big macro maps, almost all of these maps are too big for proper competitive play, only Hwangsan seems to be suited for the ladder.
Congrats to the winners, I am happy with the results personally since I was just hoping not to be #15. I appreciate all who voted for my map, and I will be around to create more maps maybe better ones in the future.
On March 11 2017 01:00 uThermal wrote: A bit sad people always just seem to vote for the big macro maps, almost all of these maps are too big for proper competitive play, only Hwangsan seems to be suited for the ladder.
Oh well, congrats to the winners ^_^
It's also because of how the categories are set-up. Due to the category being macro (and the initial requirements for the category to almost require a pocket base) all the maps tend to be very large. There isn't a good category for mid-sized standard maps which is why you see so few of them in the TLMC.
I must say I'm quite happy with the results, 4 out of 5 maps I voted for achieved top 5 finish. The only exception is Paradise Lost instead of Paradisia. Hope that we see some of these maps shortly on ladder Congratz to all mapmakers!
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Ascension of Auir and Windwaker look like excellent and clean macro maps, can't wait to try them out, congratulations to all the winners though they all look beautiful, I didn't say perfect because that's almost impossible, but beautiful is 100% on point.
Hopefully this get's the message to David and the team that the community obviously prefers clean and easy to understand, on the larger side macro maps.
On March 10 2017 22:37 fezvez wrote: Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
You disappoint me, TL community, did you forget to be elitists?
That is because couple TLMC's ago we changed the voting system from first past the post to multiple option voting, that has severely increased the overall quality of the final vote, we don't really see maps cannibalizing each other votes anymore, which is always good, tho that sadly means that it leads to people clearly and pretty much always voting for the beachy-standard maps over other more quality submissions. There also are problems with 1st stage judges and such, but those are things that we are trying to get fixed.
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
Errrr I don't think that's correct. We'll need to get negativezero in here to clarify, but as far as I know the map originated from his "bitty dot syndrome" map that he made for a map jam a long time ago, and this was the LotV-ized and flushed-out form of that concept.
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
most of BW maps are awful in SC2
"The original" (i.e. (4)Geometry) wasn't exactly a stellar success in BW either...
I am just happy to see resource flexibility finally being a thing in SC2.
Now what you guys need to finally figure out is how to make three player maps. Maxwell Platform was just another horrible attempt... Maybe blizzard can help you out a bit and at some point realize that more flexible ramp angles are a rather neat thing to have at hand. Can only take them another half of a decade...
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
Errrr I don't think that's correct. We'll need to get negativezero in here to clarify, but as far as I know the map originated from his "bitty dot syndrome" map that he made for a map jam a long time ago, and this was the LotV-ized and flushed-out form of that concept.
you're both right, the map jam concept was originally inspired by geometry (although obviously it's quite a bit different)
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
Errrr I don't think that's correct. We'll need to get negativezero in here to clarify, but as far as I know the map originated from his "bitty dot syndrome" map that he made for a map jam a long time ago, and this was the LotV-ized and flushed-out form of that concept.
you're both right, the map jam concept was originally inspired by geometry (although obviously it's quite a bit different)
yeah, i mean honestly that's soo different that I wouldn't call it a remake.
Now what you guys need to finally figure out is how to make three player maps.
It's not like we don't know how to make them - we've had a few decent ones in SC2 and honestly they're not that hard to make.. it's a lot like making a 4p just it ends up having more airspace and takes more time to get the symmetry close to 100% right. Really it's just that there isn't much reason/demand to do them so most mappers don't bother.
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
Errrr I don't think that's correct. We'll need to get negativezero in here to clarify, but as far as I know the map originated from his "bitty dot syndrome" map that he made for a map jam a long time ago, and this was the LotV-ized and flushed-out form of that concept.
you're both right, the map jam concept was originally inspired by geometry (although obviously it's quite a bit different)
yeah, i mean honestly that's soo different that I wouldn't call it a remake.
Now what you guys need to finally figure out is how to make three player maps.
It's not like we don't know how to make them - we've had a few decent ones in SC2 and honestly they're not that hard to make.. it's a lot like making a 4p just it ends up having more airspace and takes more time to get the symmetry close to 100% right. Really it's just that there isn't much reason/demand to do them so most mappers don't bother.
On March 10 2017 20:36 Plexa wrote: I was pulling for Sequencer definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder!
Congrats to Avex and the other winners
Hope so too, Sequencer has great potential.
Not surprising since it's a Korean map port lol.
Errrr I don't think that's correct. We'll need to get negativezero in here to clarify, but as far as I know the map originated from his "bitty dot syndrome" map that he made for a map jam a long time ago, and this was the LotV-ized and flushed-out form of that concept.
you're both right, the map jam concept was originally inspired by geometry (although obviously it's quite a bit different)
Yea, my apologies; when I saw your map, I was like "Jeez that's exactly the same as Geometry," but now that you've linked it, I see that they are vastly different. Something something getting old something something memory tricks etc.
On March 11 2017 12:56 Avexyli wrote: Windwaker bugs have been fixed. Both Windwaker and Hwangsan now do not permit building or burrowed unit/movement in water.
Why? I don't really see a gameplay reason for it. On Windwaker I doubt it'll matter often except as an occasional nasty gotcha for zerg players, and on Hwangsan it'll just piss off zerg players in ZvP.
On March 11 2017 19:36 outscar wrote: Why ppl so much liked Sequencer I don't get it... Because of it Acolyte got robbed to 6th place.
Because Sequencer has great depth to it in the late game. It also has a rather unique look and produced some very fun games in the Basetrade Map tournament.
I would say I don't get why people like Acolyte so much that it got 6th place, but people loved Dusk Towers so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
I think maps that have potential to 'be bad' also contain a chance of finding something new for strategies. That's the reason I voted for Paradise lost. If it doesn't, fine, veto it and have something else to replace it next season.
relatively happy with the results, though Paradise Lost and Windwaker kinda look out of place in that ranking to me. Paradise Lost has a lot of issues due to how easy you'll secure a heavy economy with defensive plays and the intricated resources repartition on Windwaker really makes me feel uneasy.
Otherwise Sequencer, Ascension to Aiur and Hwangsan are all imo promising maps I'd be happy to see on ladder.
On March 11 2017 19:36 outscar wrote: Why ppl so much liked Sequencer I don't get it... Because of it Acolyte got robbed to 6th place.
Because Sequencer has great depth to it in the late game. It also has a rather unique look and produced some very fun games in the Basetrade Map tournament.
I would say I don't get why people like Acolyte so much that it got 6th place, but people loved Dusk Towers so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
I think the pathing on Acolyte is a lot more interesting and far less turtley than Dusk Towers (for the unaware, the mapmaker took Overgrowth and then edited the map off that (adding the in-base nat and other things), and then AVEX reskinned it for him). But I do think people are tired of in-base nats in general. So maybe in that regard it's fair to lump it in with Dusk Towers.
On March 11 2017 22:18 Koivusto wrote: I think maps that have potential to 'be bad' also contain a chance of finding something new for strategies. That's the reason I voted for Paradise lost. If it doesn't, fine, veto it and have something else to replace it next season.
Sort of agree, but at the same time you can use that argument for pretty much every terrible map ever made.
On March 12 2017 03:46 TeaWhy wrote: Are those 3 bases in the top left and the bottom right on Paradise Lost island expansions?
I really like the 4th one because of its creative factor. But maybe the first three is more suitable to use in league. If they have more creative factor, it will be more funny.
On March 10 2017 22:37 fezvez wrote: Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
You disappoint me, TL community, did you forget to be elitists?
That is because couple TLMC's ago we changed the voting system from first past the post to multiple option voting, that has severely increased the overall quality of the final vote, we don't really see maps cannibalizing each other votes anymore, which is always good, tho that sadly means that it leads to people clearly and pretty much always voting for the beachy-standard maps over other more quality submissions. There also are problems with 1st stage judges and such, but those are things that we are trying to get fixed.
Anyhow, congrats Avex!
The previous FPTP system had problems that lead to the maps that stood out one way or another from the rest of the pack to win (in some cases to unfortunate effects with maps like Biome or New Polaris Rhapsody winning). Paradise Lost would have won under the previous system. This system has the opposite effect and favors maps that don't offend too many people's sensibilities. For example Ascension to Aiur is a map that I think few people would put as the best map, but many would put as the fourth or fifth best map.
While this system is better than the previous one there's still room for improvement. Though no public voting system can get rid of the public's love for beachy maps.
On March 10 2017 22:37 fezvez wrote: Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
You disappoint me, TL community, did you forget to be elitists?
That is because couple TLMC's ago we changed the voting system from first past the post to multiple option voting, that has severely increased the overall quality of the final vote, we don't really see maps cannibalizing each other votes anymore, which is always good, tho that sadly means that it leads to people clearly and pretty much always voting for the beachy-standard maps over other more quality submissions. There also are problems with 1st stage judges and such, but those are things that we are trying to get fixed.
Anyhow, congrats Avex!
The previous FPTP system had problems that lead to the maps that stood out one way or another from the rest of the pack to win (in some cases to unfortunate effects with maps like Biome or New Polaris Rhapsody winning). Paradise Lost would have won under the previous system. This system has the opposite effect and favors maps that don't offend too many people's sensibilities. For example Ascension to Aiur is a map that I think few people would put as the best map, but many would put as the fourth or fifth best map.
While this system is better than the previous one there's still room for improvement. Though no public voting system can get rid of the public's love for beachy maps.
Yeah I think both systems definitely have their flaws. Before you got just maps that stand out as you said, but may not necessarily be the best maps. Nowadays, you always get the safe turtley inoffensive maps as the top picks.
Not really sure how to do better, other than probably get rid of public voting.. yet there is a certain element of fun in getting people involved, even if it's flawed.
On March 10 2017 22:37 fezvez wrote: Why isn't there already some armchair pro mapmaker stating all the reasons why these maps are terrible, the community is beyond retarded voting for these maps and flaming everyone around?
You disappoint me, TL community, did you forget to be elitists?
That is because couple TLMC's ago we changed the voting system from first past the post to multiple option voting, that has severely increased the overall quality of the final vote, we don't really see maps cannibalizing each other votes anymore, which is always good, tho that sadly means that it leads to people clearly and pretty much always voting for the beachy-standard maps over other more quality submissions. There also are problems with 1st stage judges and such, but those are things that we are trying to get fixed.
Anyhow, congrats Avex!
The previous FPTP system had problems that lead to the maps that stood out one way or another from the rest of the pack to win (in some cases to unfortunate effects with maps like Biome or New Polaris Rhapsody winning). Paradise Lost would have won under the previous system. This system has the opposite effect and favors maps that don't offend too many people's sensibilities. For example Ascension to Aiur is a map that I think few people would put as the best map, but many would put as the fourth or fifth best map.
While this system is better than the previous one there's still room for improvement. Though no public voting system can get rid of the public's love for beachy maps.
Yeah I think both systems definitely have their flaws. Before you got just maps that stand out as you said, but may not necessarily be the best maps. Nowadays, you always get the safe turtley inoffensive maps as the top picks.
Not really sure how to do better, other than probably get rid of public voting.. yet there is a certain element of fun in getting people involved, even if it's flawed.
While public voting doesn't usually reward the best maps, it is absolutely necessary since it's the best way to encourage players to get involved with the TLMC process. Participation isn't that high as is. And besides relying entirely on the judges can also cause problems and might bias the results towards certain types of maps (like in TLMC6 where basically every finalist had a backdoor).
I think some sort of ranked voting system would give better results (such as an instant-runoff system). Though I'm pretty sure people have suggested that during previous TLMCs, and that I've had this conversation before.
On March 13 2017 23:01 paralleluniverse wrote: For the next ladder season I think Abyssal and Honorgrounds could be retained.
The new maps could include a choice of 4-5 of these: Ascension to Aiur, Acolyte, Asteroid Barricade, Sequencer, Windwaker.
For the 1 rush map: They should either retain Paladino or add in Hunger Game (but absolutely no neutral force field).
While I wouldn't complain too much about those maps individually, I don't think all together they'd make a good map pool. All of them are very big for one. It isn't a problem to have a few big maps, but a map pool needs middle-of-the-road sized maps too (and by middle-of-the-road I mean maps sized similarly to Hwangsan or Echo, not rush maps). The categories that Blizzard gave for the past two TLMCs have done a lot to cut down on mid-sized maps unfortunately.
EPT
definitely showed the most promising games from the test tournament. Hope it still makes it to the ladder! 
