EPTTeam Liquid Map Contest 10 - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
On January 20 2018 09:26 Yonnua wrote: That makes sense. You'd want time to test the maps for a month or two before they were used in a tournament. This made me giggle way too hard, so thanks for that. xD | ||
|
KaiserCommander
Mexico290 Posts
| ||
|
Avexyli
United States700 Posts
The ideas of KSS would be the forward natural, with two entrances into it (one rocked off), with 'two' choices of third bases. There's also the outside paths along the sides. In LotV we never saw these paths used, we saw Tanks and Libs abuse the shit out of the forward natural and rocked off bases, Zerg was the only race to really use the rocked third because they were forced to break those rocks. In LotV we still have to make maps that are the sizes of maps in HotS, but with more bases, less unique areas of engagement (especially in 2player maps) and with all the relative checks in mind, such as lib abuse. It's much easier to introduce standard maps with interesting features like NVS' squares than pushing the bounds. We tried pushing bounds, it failed. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
| ||
|
Avexyli
United States700 Posts
| ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
It's not like you have to hide the mechanic, the map description could say there is a minefield or lava, lava can have a timer, a neutral structure can have a map marker like the xel naga towers do. It's also not like the whole map pool has to be full of maps like this It could only be 1 map, people have map vetos but it would be nice to see some map innovation beyond path blockers and base layout. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
On January 21 2018 20:27 Zaros wrote: That is not really a good reason IMO, people aren't stupid people have to learn the map anyway most of the people playing this game are too stupid to learn a new build order | ||
|
VSG
Hong Kong7 Posts
| ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
On January 21 2018 16:07 Avexyli wrote: Blizzard keeps that stuff for Co-Op. You will never see that on ladder, no matter how many people ask for it. It goes against the fairness of two players knowing the same information each time they load up ladder. On January 21 2018 20:27 Zaros wrote: That is not really a good reason IMO, people aren't stupid people have to learn the map anyway and there can be plenty of terrain gimmicks or positioning that one player can know over the other already. It's not like you have to hide the mechanic, the map description could say there is a minefield or lava, lava can have a timer, a neutral structure can have a map marker like the xel naga towers do. It's also not like the whole map pool has to be full of maps like this It could only be 1 map, people have map vetos but it would be nice to see some map innovation beyond path blockers and base layout. If they would put more information on the loading screens (and fix/overhaul them) and added a 3 second countdown after each player was loaded, connected, whatever, then it could allow for a lot more unique features on a couple of maps per ladder season imo. It might not make rising lava maps doable for normal ladder, but I think it's very possible to do a lot more with the empty and sometimes broken "spaces" like loading screens, replay load times and rewind/overall playback and usability/accessibility of the replay system. The 1v1 ladder page can definitely be improved to give access to more information too (option to look at maps while searching for a game instead of stare at an old, cool but still old, model of a Hydralisk for example). Also, if people want them they should TOTALLY keep asking for a more open category + Show Spoiler + or entire contest Do it. I know you want to. Just keep asking for a rising lava map contest and it might (tiny chance) totally (hmm...) absolutely happen (probably not unless a lot of people ask for it) soon (eventually maybe). | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
Even if the TLMC does not expand to nonladder maps, it can still expand to other portions of the ladder, like 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4. It would be great for TL or Blizzard (or both) to provide a platform for the community to express themselves. The rewards could be set at 0 or something like the community portrait and maps would still be submitted for some extraneous categories. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On January 23 2018 06:35 Antares777 wrote: I think splitting the map community with multiple different competitions would be a mistake. It would be better for the TLMC to expand in the future and have more narrow categories. There can be one for melee maps that include features that are disallowed for the ladder map portion of the competition, another for best co-op map, etc. Even if the TLMC does not expand to nonladder maps, it can still expand to other portions of the ladder, like 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4. It would be great for TL or Blizzard (or both) to provide a platform for the community to express themselves. The rewards could be set at 0 or something like the community portrait and maps would still be submitted for some extraneous categories. I doubt that'll happen. 2v2/3v3/4v4 just don't have enough players or exposure to be worth the effort for Blizzard. Besides, what does a 4v4 map that has enough expansions for macro to be viable, and yet does not have excessive distances everywhere even look like? | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
So the lack of good 4 player maps is a big problem. I hope there's at least one ladder-usable 4 player map that comes out of this TLMC, so this situation doesn't repeat itself. 4 player maps have also lack variety. They've all been macro maps. I'd like to see a standard or rush 4 player map. | ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
Most 4p maps live purely off of nostalgia and it's easy to forget the frustrating parts about spawn imbalances. There also was a standard sized 4p map, Lerilak Crest. It was not well received | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On January 25 2018 19:46 Liquid`Snute wrote: 4 player maps are awful for 1v1, there are too many spawn issues and base count always becomes exaggerated. A lot of players not just pros requested to not have 4p maps and imo it's working well, we're getting more and more variety in the 2p maps now. There's no need for alterzim or deadwing when you can have ascension to aiur etc. Most 4p maps live purely off of nostalgia and it's easy to forget the frustrating parts about spawn imbalances. There also was a standard sized 4p map, Lerilak Crest. It was not well received You have Darkness Sanctuary in GSL, so I don't think your mission to eradicate 4 player maps is going that well. If 4 player maps are killed forever, that's fine, but having bad 3-4 player maps is worse than having good ones. | ||
|
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
 | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
In LoTV, players need more and more bases in smaller and smaller spaces. So, it generally means you're going to have about 5 bases per corner for each player, which means at least 20 bases on the entire map, which is a shit ton of bases to fit in when you're trying to keep it in at least a 72x72 (at most 80x80) square since you'll have to mirror/rotate it 3x. Yes, pretty much any map bigger than 160x160 sucks. Sorry, it's just too big for the most part. With that said though, I am going to submit one 4p map this tournament under the new section. I'm sure tons of players will hate it if it ends up being picked up. I mean, all spawns would be enabled and there are plenty of air blockers as well. Both things many players dislike lol. But hey, I like to experiment sometimes, have 6 entries, so why not!  | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
 5 2p maps, 1 4p map. oohh yeah! I'll probably post pics and overviews soon enough. =) | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/5SdL2oN.png) Dunno if I'll submit anything else. | ||
| ||
