EPTTeam Liquid Map Contest #11 Finalists - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Fanatic-Templar
Canada5819 Posts
| ||
|
Avexyli
United States702 Posts
The white lines are smoke from LOS blockers. | ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
| ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2142 Posts
On July 31 2018 13:13 Ej_ wrote: In-base natural makes it to challenge category, shoot me "Guidelines: Design a map where each player’s starting location and/or natural expansion are close by air but further by ground. The map should also favor aggression from both players" | ||
|
Durnuu
13322 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
Still not sold on this neutral missile turret thingy. However I have a proposition : What about changing the format of the TLMC and adopting a General ticket representation format where each judge picks 7 maps and the public gets to vote for one of the judge's map pack (And keep the map packs anonymous to avoid any popularity contest between the juries) It would allow for greater map diversity and better reflect each of the judge's opinion on the maps that were submitted. That'd also allow for a larger jury panel more representative of the whole community  It could go like this : 2 voting phase : Phase 1 : The community votes for their favourite map pack. The two most voted map packs (14 maps total) get tested during the map test tournament Phase 2 : Either the community gets to choose between one of the two map packs or the two map packs get merged and we get to vote for each map individualy like it's the case right now | ||
|
Zerg.Zilla
Hungary5029 Posts
| ||
|
Shathe
Hungary422 Posts
| ||
|
151
10 Posts
bye. | ||
Liquid`Snute
Norway839 Posts
On July 31 2018 15:57 algue wrote: As always, I find the judging pretty uninspired but with 2 progamers in the jury it's always to be expected. At least this time I know which map I'll vote for so that's positive. Still not sold on this neutral missile turret thingy. However I have a proposition : What about changing the format of the TLMC and adopting a General ticket representation format where each judge picks 7 maps and the public gets to vote for one of the judge's map pack (And keep the map packs anonymous to avoid any popularity contest between the juries) It would allow for greater map diversity and better reflect each of the judge's opinion on the maps that were submitted. That'd also allow for a larger jury panel more representative of the whole community It could go like this : 2 voting phase : Phase 1 : The community votes for their favourite map pack. The two most voted map packs (14 maps total) get tested during the map test tournament Phase 2 : Either the community gets to choose between one of the two map packs or the two map packs get merged and we get to vote for each map individualy like it's the case right now Map diversity is already very high by the contest's design, it's pretty hard NOT to get diversity with this even if the voting seems "uninspired" to some. It's not like the pros "win out every time" or anything, the judges are also competing. All of this depends on your map-political stance too. For some people it would be unfathomable to have TLMC judged by anything BUT pros, for others they would rather see all pros removed. It's hard enough as it is to get anyone - pros or not - to take time out of their life to help study/judge sadly. Personally I think TLMC judging should have at least 3+ high ranking pros of each race, but it's hard. Idk. I've written this many times before on these forums but I think the 7 map pool thing is flawed to begin with. It would be amazing to have a secondary matchmaking-ladder with a ridiculously large amount of maps. Too bad about queue time being the big scary monster preventing it. Would be easier to keep balanced/standard maps contained to WCS/GSL and allow for fun on the side. Easier for pros to be a bit less 'sensible' in terms of balance-weighted voting for contests like this too. For example I noticed a map that could've been great for mirror match-ups or in general, but most likely would have ZvT balance issues. From a tournament perspective it's not good to have maps that are clearly going to get vetoed consistently in one match-up or will affect balance in a bo5s or bo7 finals where you run out of vetos. Things like that. It's an unfortunate situation how restrictive the map pool system has been through the years. But yeah a bit off-topic and we all know the 7map situation is not going anywhere anyway, lol. There's plenty of other ideas out there on how to improve things, but we have to work with what we have. Lots of great entries in this one and I hope there'll be even more entries and especially judges for the next ones.  | ||
|
Kerdinand
Germany113 Posts
Even the first map (that takes a "lighter appoach") has a whole battery of RMTs, and the others always use them in packs of 4, and lots of those packs. This is not really meant to be criticizing, but could maybe someone explain why they weren't used in smaller numbers? Would they have too little significance then? | ||
|
TheHallucinati
7 Posts
On August 01 2018 02:05 Kerdinand wrote: I'm honestly a bit surprised by the Challenge #2. I expected the RMTs to be more like Xel'Naga towers, where you have like 1 or 2 at strategic positions, to prevent observers or lone medivacs from passing. But it seems like the mapmakers really spammed the turrets to huge amounts. Even the first map (that takes a "lighter appoach") has a whole battery of RMTs, and the others always use them in packs of 4, and lots of those packs. This is not really meant to be criticizing, but could maybe someone explain why they weren't used in smaller numbers? Would they have too little significance then? Cant speak for others, but I submitted a map to challenge two with 8 RMT pods, and was told that it didnt have enough RMTs for the challenge. Maps with fewer RMTs were likely just not selected. | ||
|
cYaN
Norway3322 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On August 01 2018 02:05 Kerdinand wrote: I'm honestly a bit surprised by the Challenge #2. I expected the RMTs to be more like Xel'Naga towers, where you have like 1 or 2 at strategic positions, to prevent observers or lone medivacs from passing. But it seems like the mapmakers really spammed the turrets to huge amounts. Even the first map (that takes a "lighter appoach") has a whole battery of RMTs, and the others always use them in packs of 4, and lots of those packs. This is not really meant to be criticizing, but could maybe someone explain why they weren't used in smaller numbers? Would they have too little significance then? They are destructible and don't have much hp, so having very few would just bother zergs early on and not have any effect later in the game. | ||
|
Carminedust
487 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
| ||
|
Superouman
France2195 Posts
On August 01 2018 01:05 Liquid`Snute wrote: Map diversity is already very high by the contest's design, it's pretty hard NOT to get diversity with this even if the voting seems "uninspired" to some. It's not like the pros "win out every time" or anything, the judges are also competing. All of this depends on your map-political stance too. For some people it would be unfathomable to have TLMC judged by anything BUT pros, for others they would rather see all pros removed. It's hard enough as it is to get anyone - pros or not - to take time out of their life to help study/judge sadly. Personally I think TLMC judging should have at least 3+ high ranking pros of each race, but it's hard. Idk. I've written this many times before on these forums but I think the 7 map pool thing is flawed to begin with. It would be amazing to have a secondary matchmaking-ladder with a ridiculously large amount of maps. Too bad about queue time being the big scary monster preventing it. Would be easier to keep balanced/standard maps contained to WCS/GSL and allow for fun on the side. Easier for pros to be a bit less 'sensible' in terms of balance-weighted voting for contests like this too. For example I noticed a map that could've been great for mirror match-ups or in general, but most likely would have ZvT balance issues. From a tournament perspective it's not good to have maps that are clearly going to get vetoed consistently in one match-up or will affect balance in a bo5s or bo7 finals where you run out of vetos. Things like that. It's an unfortunate situation how restrictive the map pool system has been through the years. But yeah a bit off-topic and we all know the 7map situation is not going anywhere anyway, lol. There's plenty of other ideas out there on how to improve things, but we have to work with what we have. Lots of great entries in this one and I hope there'll be even more entries and especially judges for the next ones. Were you on the judge team this time? We can't know since the process is opaque. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On August 01 2018 22:42 Superouman wrote: Were you on the judge team this time? We can't know since the process is opaque. The post straight up says that Snute, TLO, JuggernautJason, UpATreeZelda and Kantuva were judges. | ||
| ||
