| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
On February 12 2018 23:13 revolt777 wrote: Great maps these time. When are they playable online? Some are if you search the name, but the TLMC versions will be uploaded after the finalists are announced in a couple more days. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
On February 12 2018 21:59 -NegativeZero- wrote: tlmc hype seems strangely low this time I don't want to be rude I know map making is hard work and takes up a lot of time but I'm disappointed with the lack of "new" maps and those that there are seem to be the same "new" concepts that we have seen before in islands and minerals blocking off areas. | ||
|
Drfilip
Sweden590 Posts
On February 13 2018 02:05 Zaros wrote: I don't want to be rude I know map making is hard work and takes up a lot of time but I'm disappointed with the lack of "new" maps and those that there are seem to be the same "new" concepts that we have seen before in islands and minerals blocking off areas. The reason I don't have a lot of hype for this is purely personal. I don't have the time to look at the maps, It's just a time of the year when I am very busy. I have enough time to read the comments, but I haven't got the time to form an opinion of my own. | ||
|
Avexyli
United States700 Posts
On February 13 2018 02:05 Zaros wrote: I don't want to be rude I know map making is hard work and takes up a lot of time but I'm disappointed with the lack of "new" maps and those that there are seem to be the same "new" concepts that we have seen before in islands and minerals blocking off areas. There's alot of limitations that prevent many new things from occuring. We can't do neutral eggs, we can't use forcefields, we can't have custom data, so why really bother when I could spend less time making a solid standard map? Sovereign was a new map at first, with neutral eggs. | ||
|
Youngrustler
United States70 Posts
On February 13 2018 02:05 Zaros wrote: I don't want to be rude I know map making is hard work and takes up a lot of time but I'm disappointed with the lack of "new" maps and those that there are seem to be the same "new" concepts that we have seen before in islands and minerals blocking off areas. As AVEX stated above “new” is really hard to do when there is such a limit of what you can do to the map. The running joke is that AVEX just submitted 6 standard maps, but put them in different categories, and honestly that’s all we get shouted at to do from the community/pro players. When a new map is submitted you can just hear the rage from people who don’t want new maps, and only standard maps. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
On February 13 2018 02:55 Youngrustler wrote: As AVEX stated above “new” is really hard to do when there is such a limit of what you can do to the map. The running joke is that AVEX just submitted 6 standard maps, but put them in different categories, and honestly that’s all we get shouted at to do from the community/pro players. When a new map is submitted you can just hear the rage from people who don’t want new maps, and only standard maps. Fair enough maybe there needs to be a new only contest or something if the incentives aren't there. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On February 13 2018 03:14 Zaros wrote: Fair enough maybe there needs to be a new only contest or something if the incentives aren't there. Who would sponsor it? The TLMC essentially exists to provide Blizzard with for tournament and ladder play. There is no place for non-standard maps if they're deemed unsuitable for ladder. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On February 13 2018 03:45 Plexa wrote: I'll chip in say that the concerns about the new category have been heard. There is a desire to make changes to the category in future - if you have suggestions for that we're all ears. Are changes for the 'Rush' category being considered? Because 'Rush' maps have been even less successful than the 'New' category (which at least has had its share of popular maps). | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
On February 13 2018 03:45 Plexa wrote: I'll chip in say that the concerns about the new category have been heard. There is a desire to make changes to the category in future - if you have suggestions for that we're all ears. So custom data needs to be allowed. You're only playing with like 1% of the possibilities with it not being allowed. But there needs to be limitations to this. The "new" thing needs to be very easy to understand/as intuitive as possible. (If it's deemed too hard to understand by the judges then it doesn't make the cut) There's other things you could add but this is the groundwork for how it needs to work. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On February 13 2018 05:48 Fatam wrote: So custom data needs to be allowed. You're only playing with like 1% of the possibilities with it not being allowed. But there needs to be limitations to this. The "new" thing needs to be very easy to understand/as intuitive as possible. (If it's deemed too hard to understand by the judges then it doesn't make the cut) There's other things you could add but this is the groundwork for how it needs to work. Yeah. Take for example the idea of neutral forcefields as they were implemented on Geumgangsan. The problems with it were that the forcefields were not visible through the FOW, not visible on the minimap and were 'units' not 'buildings' which messed with pathing thus trapping units. If you fixed the visibility problems, and the pathing problems (which takes custom data) it's pretty intuitive (now whether it makes a balanced map is another issue, but that's besides the point). Rich vespene geysers or a second type of watchtower with shorter range are also things that wouldn't be too unintuitive if and only if they had a clear and distinctively different look from the regular ones. | ||
|
Avexyli
United States700 Posts
Creating forcefields with proper footprint, show up in FOW. Rich Geysers (at least give them a unique model, which means custom data & model/texture) Neutral blinding clouds. Constant hostile storms. Slow zones (ie units that walk in water are slowed) Different kinds of watchtowers (such as sensor tower watchtowers, blinding cloud towers) Hostile special turrets, etc. There's lots of cool things we can do, but we really can't. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
themusic246
United States213 Posts
Without custom data, more Object Property parameter options in the terrain editor, or new pre-packaged fun stuff to play with, then yea just combine "Rush" and "New" categories into one category called "Unconventional" that includes "new" ideas, rush maps, and the less-common symmetry layouts to help balance the category distribution  </myThoughts> | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
| ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
On February 13 2018 08:20 Meavis wrote: or at least mineral walls, half bases, neutral geysers I'd like to second this suggestion. This is something that would not force Blizzard to redesign or fix part of the game and could be incorporated into the next TLMC's "new" category. What do you mean by neutral geysers? Do you mean using them to change pathing like this? I do not think that rush maps and new maps should be one category. I think that would overall end up decreasing the diversity of the submissions. I'm starting to think that maybe every once in a while, there should be a 4 player map category for maps with 4 spawns, seeing how unpopular they have become recently. | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
On February 13 2018 08:04 themusic246 wrote: Correct me if i'm wrong... but allowing custom data would expose the possibility of bugs if future patches with modified "parent objects" from the source dependency conflicted with the customized objects. If true, blizz would need to go through and create a bunch of new stuff (like in the list avex mentioned) pre-packaged in the dependency to allow us stuff to play with, but not customize the data itself. Or just things like passing in parameters like "watchtower vision distance" that we can modify in the actual terrain editor (separate from data). Without custom data, more Object Property parameter options in the terrain editor, or new pre-packaged fun stuff to play with, then yea just combine "Rush" and "New" categories into one category called "Unconventional" that includes "new" ideas, rush maps, and the less-common symmetry layouts to help balance the category distribution </myThoughts> It's true to a certain extent, but if you do it right and either create all your custom data from scratch or duplicate all the parent objects it's mostly avoidable. Most mapmakers wouldn't do that though and it's not always possible to get all of the parent data. It is a big QA hazard though and would create a lot of work for Blizzard. I think the trick with "new" maps is really to create something that is new, without requiring players to learn new build orders or radically pigeonhole their play style. Players don't want to learn a new set of builds or have to prepare for a bunch of totally unusual stuff that might be extraneous outside of this one map. There's a lot of really interesting things you can do even without gimmicks and custom data but most of those things require a big time investment to learn how to play it. | ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
Right now, with how the siege units are in SC2 and LotV mixed with everything else, it really feels like more "wild" concepts for future-standard map design should be something to seriously consider pushing a little harder if those siege units and certain strategies aren't going anywhere or nobody finds a way to design for or against those units' abilities in a new way any time soon. I'm also starting to wonder more and more if the reason some players feel that units/the economy/etc. need to be changed greatly every few months to a year is because the game design doesn't allow for interesting maps that can keep the game feeling fresh and "balanced". I also think player mindset, what we think we should expect of players, or both, could change a little and maybe, again, they/we need to be given a little test nudge in one direction or the other, but that's probably a topic for another place and time. The number one reason I am personally not super hyped about this TLMC, fiddling with my own maps, playing a bunch of the submissions, all that, is because I just don't have the time lately (and internet struggles, it's killing me). Other people do seem a little "meh" over this one though, could be a lot of reasons for that; it could be our attitudes about it turning everybody else off from getting hyped about it, could be balance, could be the weather, idk. That's a lot to think about, so I'll stop before I ramble on or edit this post any more and my internet shuts down on me again or my phone crashes. *Maybe what needs to happen to allow for all this other stuff is to... design in a way that aims to make it so for 6-12 months, on most maps for that time period, there are a couple of builds or strategies or simple openings from each race that work well and are "balanced", and later in that I-kinda-just-threw-out-two-numbers time period the maps went from being 4/5s "standard" to being 2/3 "standard" with the rest being slightly more new/interesting. Then start back from the beginning when bigger patches come out on ladder... That'd take very different [everything] of course, but... Anywho. Random thoughts and pipe dreams is what I have a lot of lately. And rambling, always rambling. xD | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
On February 13 2018 16:13 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I think the reason people seem to care less about this TLMC is simply because the past two map pools have been mostly decent. People cared more before since so many ladder maps were trainwrecks. Also a lot of events have been happening. A lot of StarCraft events and the "Winter Sports Games" or somethin' I keep hearing about, maybe that has a lot to do with it... | ||
| ||
LAN Event
Stellar Fest: Day 1
Lambo vs Harstem
FuturE vs Maplez
Scarlett vs FoxeR
Gerald vs Mixu
Zoun vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
ByuN vs TBD
TriGGeR vs TBD
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
dxtr13 vs OldBoy
Napoleon vs Doodle
LAN Event
BSL 21
Gosudark vs Kyrie
Gypsy vs Sterling
UltrA vs Radley
Dandy vs Ptak
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
IPSL
JDConan vs WIZARD
WolFix vs Cross
LAN Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
