The entries are all in and judged. So it's now time for the fun part!
First off, congratulations to everyone to entered a map into TLMC11. This was the largest contest we've ever had with over 170 maps submitted, including 70 in the standard category alone. Not only was this the most maps we've seen but the quality of the submissions was incredible. The judges remarked that if you removed the finalists from the map pool that they would be able to select another sixteen maps to take their place without much problem. This means choosing the finalists this season was very competitive and there were good maps that were not selected - we hope to see those maps resubmitted in future seasons.
The contest was shaken up a bit this go around with the addition of the Challenge categories and we were happy to see so many rise to the challenge. In fact, across the board we had a very high number of submissions so competition was fierce. Stay tuned to WardiTV for the TLMC tournament so you can be informed on who to vote for in the final stage of the competition.
One last note before we get into the finalists, our amazing judges! Without them we wouldn't be able to bring you this contest, so please give a special thanks to: JuggernautJason, UpATreeZelda, TLO, Snute, and Uvantak!
FINALISTS
Standard Maps
A total of 64 maps were submitted to this category. In this category, the judges looked for maps that were well-executed or gave us slight deviations from what we're used to.
Crystal Cavern | Meavis
Crystal Cavern is one of the more colorful maps in the contest with each quadrant being color-coded.
This map also features a long reinforcement time from main to natural.
Cyber Forest | Pklixian
Cyber Forest features destructible elements near the potential third bases which can significantly open them up to attack.
The main bases are very open and may allow for drops or probes to hide if not properly secured.
Kairos Junction | Solstice245
Kairos Junction is the map with the shortest rush distances in this category.
Beyond the short direct route, however, there are alternate paths and no Watch Towers to assist in scouting.
Reminiscence | Youngrustler
Reminiscence features a circular design where the mains are drawn slightly into the middle.
Slightly wider natural ramps will also provide a unique challenge.
Year Zero | AVEX
Year Zero features has the longest rush distance among the Standard Maps with the option to open an even faster route.
The northern Watch Tower will also be a key strategic location early in the game.
Macro Maps
A total of 46 maps were submitted to this category. For this category, judges focused on the ones that truly promoted macro play and had interesting layouts throughout the entire map.
Automaton | RQM
Automaton features main bases that are (relatively) close together by air but the natural expansions are more protected.
This is one of the smaller Macro Maps to have been selected.
King's Cove | SidianTheBard
For a Macro Map, King's Cove has main bases on the smaller side so space may be tight as the game progresses.
The potential third bases also force a decision between the close option or the open one.
New Repugnancy | Sanglune
New Repugnancy has a fairly congested center area which could prove problematic for the maneuvering of large armies late in the game.
Destructible rocks on the top and bottom of the map can enable different routes to later bases when focus is most heavily taxed.
Port Aleksander | Youngrustler
Port Aleksander is the largest of the Macro Maps with a 46 second rush time between naturals.
For all their distance, the main bases are very vulnerable to air attacks should units be able to skirt the edges of the maps.
Challenge #1 Maps
Antigonus | Xancake
Antigonus also meets the challenge by having a base that's very open to air and very hard to attack by ground.
If both players survive the early air attacks, they will have an easy time securing three bases but the fourth will be very difficult.
Extraction | themusic246
Extraction takes the challenge and applies it to the naturals in a big way.
The walking rush distance is the longest of any Challenge #1 Map but the proximity by air more than makes up for this.
Lotus | themusic246
A bridge connecting the backs of both gold bases is one of the most unique features present in our finalists.
Lotus also features a pair of Watch Towers which are only accessible by air or by the removal of rocks.
Stasis | NewSunshine
Aesthetically, Stasis is one of the most unique maps in the competition.
The "close by air" challenge is also mirrored in this map by the natural expansions which are very vulnerable to air-based harass.
Challenge #2 Maps
Crystalline Addiction | Xancake
Crystalline Addiction takes a much lighter touch with the Renegade Missile Turrets.
This is also one of the smallest maps in the contest and the walking rush distance is very short through the turret hallway.
Ritual Moopy Temple | IeZaeL
Ritual Moopy Temple makes extensive use of the Renegade Missile Turrets and ensures they will be a relevant factor at all points in the game.
In exchange for the high risk to air units, this map will allow for relatively safe expansions.
Sudden Awakening | JaleVeliki
Sudden Awakening uses the Renegade Missile Turret challenge to separate the main bases and also give some flavor to the one gold base on the map.
While the removal of but one set of rocks can dramatically shorten this map, the rush distance with the rocks in place is a whopping 50 seconds.
What's Next?
The mappers have done their work so now it is time to discuss! Which maps do you think stand above the rest? Who best implemented the new Challenges? Pick your favorites and make your case.
If you're still undecided, or just enjoy fun Starcraft, tune into Wardi's tournament and see the maps in action! After that we'll allow a brief adjustment period for the mappers to implement your feedback and then it's time to vote.
This is pretty damn solid. Though I personally would of liked to see other maps than what selected (the more pretty ones but what we got are solid.) And I'm personally glad that I'm a finalist. Cyber Forest, a map I made soon after Temple Overgrowth. You did not fail me, and I hope you can make it to the very end. To my other maps, well Temple Overgrowth I was expecting to be a finalist, as I spent far to long making it. So much love and care and late night coffee hours.
To Voided Reality, well it was a pure rush map that was designed for ground aggression. I was not a fan of challenge 1 so this map not being a finalist is perfectly fine. I'll just perfect it and submit it on another TLMC :l or use its theme concept in another TLMC.
To Military Wasteland and Axes Station. Military Wasteland I could of just removed the turrets and submitted it as macro. It was my best map for its size, but besides that. It wouldn't cut out for a finalist spot in my eyes. And to Axes Station, well you were a failure. 5 base behind 1 choke speaks about that a lot.
And finally to Ruined City. Well you were the best I could do for challenge 1. I expected no success, it was just my lazy map. And it not making it made me happy.
For all of the finalist, Good Job! I'm glad to be standing alongside you this TLMC and may I hope to see who will come out into the top 5 at the end! and to those who didn't make it. Many of you (of what I've seen) had maps far prettier than mine. and continue with the great work and get it next TLMC! may the light of Cylixia cover you all.
I felt a little bit like puking when KING'S COVE brought back flashbacks of boredom, due to how long abysmal reef overstayed it's welcome with me. Then I saw TLO was on the judges panel, may god have mercy on my ladder experience...
On the plus side, not all the maps use depressing color palettes this time around
Wow, not only did the judges manage to include some hugely mediocre maps as usual, they also repeated the mistakes of TLMC6 by making the half the finalists fit some idea they want to push (in this case 'Ulrena' style spawns).
Blizzard already made a category that is a superset of that, they really didn't need to only pick maps like that for the renegade turret category too.
Probably the worst judging since TLMC8 (and that time the time constraints could be used as an excuse). We can count ourselves lucky that Enekh is gone on military service, since with judging like this I have no doubts he would have swept the contest.
"Not only was this the most maps we've seen but the quality of the submissions was incredible."
- still 3 of those finalists have already been submitted to older TLMCs and didnt make it. One of those even submitted twice i think. Quality wasnt THAT high after all it seems
there are some good maps in here, but i really wish the judges had been more creative with the challenge categories - the challenge 2 winners all have the exact same concept with the RMTs, just rotated in different directions.
On July 31 2018 08:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Wow, not only did the judges manage to include some hugely mediocre maps as usual, they also repeated the mistakes of TLMC6 by making the half the finalists fit some idea they want to push (in this case 'Ulrena' style spawns).
Small correction, King Sejong Station was a map that was included as an exemplar for the category. Ulrena style wasn't the only style of map that was permitted here.
Oh and for anyone wondering the squares on Crystalline Addiction do not contrarily to the map description allow only 'small' units to pass, or even allow everything but Archons, Ultralisks, Tanks, and Thors like the squares on Neon Violet Square do. They allow every unit in the game except for Tanks and Thors to go through, which I'm sure terran players will love.
On July 31 2018 08:24 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Wow, not only did the judges manage to include some hugely mediocre maps as usual, they also repeated the mistakes of TLMC6 by making the half the finalists fit some idea they want to push (in this case 'Ulrena' style spawns).
Small correction, King Sejong Station was a map that was included as an exemplar for the category. Ulrena style wasn't the only style of map that was permitted here.
I know that's what Category #1 was described as--but clearly what the judges wanted to push was Ulrena spawns, since half of Category #1, all of Category #2 (which really didn't need to be that) + Year Zero are like.
The most inexplicable finalist to me (though not the worst finalist) is Crystal Cavern. I can even begin to fathom the reasoning for including it among the finalists out of all 64 (or 70, the article contradicts itself) standard maps submitted. It just doesn't seem to have any merits (except for being boring which is probably a merit to some of the judges tbf).
crystal cavern isnt that good tbth, huuuuuge reaper ledge thats super abusable, not sure how its not 'macro' as you have 4 bases tucked in the edge/corner with realistically 2 chokes. cyber forest is ok kairos is good reminis is... pretty boring nothing interesting i like automaton quite a bit kings cove is a worse abyssal reef, nothing really interesting new repub is ok, not my favorite sang map port aleksander i like, but im a bit biased as i did the aesthetics some time ago antigonus is probably a bit too macro for sake like whats the point of a KSS style if you have an inbase nat extraction is just a weaker KSS imo lotus would be cool if the mineral wall did something stasis was one of my favs crystalline is ok, but then you realize the unpathable squares are super broken (Winter figured out a bunch of issues with them and big armies on stream) moopy temple is not interesting imo, its really really hard to harass anything and i liked sudden awakening, just needs some tweaking in the main center
Congrats all! I was hoping Dunes of Destiny would do well as that was my favorite entry of the bunch...and probably the most interesting with pathing but King's got in so that's cool. Funny too because last season I convinced myself King's would be a finalist and then it wasn't, so I did a couple changes to it and just threw it into my submissions because I didn't care to make another map lol.
Fun times.
Also, come on, No 2f0rt?!?! The turrets really made the map 110% better!
Pretty sad to see these results. There are a handful of submitted maps of stellar quality that seem to have been skipped over in favor of pretty boring stuff. Ephemeron, Red Mad Thief, and Shamrock Fane come to mind. There are solid finalists in the Standard & Macro categories, but the challenge map selections are especially inexplicable.
Crystalline Addiction's presence in the finalists is probably the most confusing detail to me. Aside from issues raised earlier about bugs in the NVS-style choke hallways, their presence overall makes no sense on a map of this size. In a mid-late game scenario, the map literally becomes just two chokes. Category 2 had an enormous variety of submissions. Might as well play Paranoid Android
I can't really tell from these full-map screenshots, but from here it looks like Automaton has wood panelling for its low ground, which is novel. Not sure about the white lines though.
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"
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
Incidentally props to JaleVeliki for very deservedly making it into the finals--to the best of my knowledge he hasn't been mapmaking long at all (only a few months?) which makes the fact that he was able to create a map of the caliber of Sudden Awakening all the more impressive.
Weird to see that an extractor is impossible to build on a vespene geyser on King's Cove. Seems like the most basic map testing one can do is loading the map, taking all the bases and building extractors everywhere.
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.
Were you on the judge team this time? We can't know since the process is opaque.
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.
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.
Congrats everyone who have gotten in the finals, and good to see new folks are coming up with some maps now to compete. So always love to hear feedback on either of my maps that are finalist.
On August 02 2018 19:14 Miwyfe wrote: Can someone give me a bit of background on who JuggernautJason and UpATreeZelda are? And what are their teamliquid account names please.
These neutral anti air turrets need to be invincible and not attackable, so you can attack move between them with ground units. This way it is possible to create avenues where ground rules and air units cant go. Right now those turrets either mess up attack moves or serve as airblocker in areas where ground units cant operate which airblockers already did in a better way. Airblocker do the same but dont punish "bad" players as much. But we need to improve airblocker because units get stuck there sometimes. Give them a 1 range 1 damage attack so they acknowlegde players about units stuck there without killing them.
Alright so when the finalist was announced I gave a more light handed response since I was happy I became a finalist. now here's my thoughts on all maps, what I feel are bad or good with them (even on my own.) And if I have no thoughts, well... not much can be said. Anyways first to be said, with the rush category being removed things because more annoying than difficult.
Challenge 1 "Close by air, far by ground. The maps should favor aggression" comes off my mind. wasn't a great category. insta DQed any good promising rush maps which annoyed me. but its fine. Challenge 2 or the RMT category this TLMC... was terrible... somewhat. I'll get to that later.
Anyways from Standard to Challenge 2. Here's my thoughts.
Crystal Cavern This map is the first standard finalist on the map. First of all the decoration theme though unique really distracts me and hurts my eyes. As I want to look at every corner at once due to their colors. but that isn't generally a problem.
This map generally favor zerg from the games I've seen in the TLMC tourny. But also with its layout. The third plainly is in the open and zerg has a straight runway into it. While the layout not being great and punishes terrans and sometimes protosses who dont play more safe vs zerg. any other matchup is fine.
The expansion pattern brings you close to the enemies nat which I fear. but thats perfectly fine. comes with the symmetry. anyways thats all I got.
Cyber Forest Cyber Forest is my only finalist map I've ever had. And it was my second map with this first 4 base setup similar to blackpink.
Cyber Forest decoration style was more of a test and though from the games I've seen and the chatting I've done. People like it, though it seems rather 50/50 in my eyes and could be better. Of course thats just the deco. The layout favors fluid aggression as thats all I'm about. Maybe a bit too much though.
I've seen games where bio/zerg make use of the center map so well that mech/protoss may struggle to keep them under control. While the expansion pattern is pretty solid. I fear people wont want to expand past the highground third/fourth/fifth vs a zerg.
Karios Junction For one, love its name and its decoration is quite nice. As far as I know the layout is being improved upon so this will be short.
generally from the games I've seen its a pretty even split which is very nice and the map is solid. Though the rush distance I'm a bit scared about its not a problem at all later on any game. so GJ!
Reminiscene First of all I'm not a fan of how the map looks. But eh, thats no problem. With how the expansions are you may end up near the enemies natural but I dont expect the games to go as long. Though I feel bio or protoss may have some nice leverage on the map vs zerg if they dont make use of keeping aggro as its a strong sieging point. besides that, GJ on the map.
Year Zero So simple to say love the decoration, love the map. Its so solid that I cannot complain at all, also I love Amon whos top center of the map :D
Automaton This nice steampunk-esk macro map is something I like. from the games I've seen its fairly solid and no real problems. even being semi close by air the map is really good so theres nothing I can say bad about it.
King's Cove When I look at this map, well first its a beach map :l but second it reminds me of an abyssal remake but different in someway. From the same creator last time I checked the map may see some nice macro games. or turtling.
one third seems fairly far which I'm not a fan of while the other is more open. the third third is just painly too far for terran/protoss and normally will not be taken until later on. besides that standard macro layout, defensive locations that are also good for aggression. no more is needed to be said.
New Repugnancy decoration is rather meh but the layout is quite fair. I like the middle but generally not the highground beside the base near top left/bot right. besides that. Well, I wish the marine kepted its top hat ;-;.
Port Aleksander This is a great and beautiful macro map. with many great solid games on it from the TLMC tourny I cannot say anything bad about this map. I want it on the ladder nooooooooow!
Antigonus The first challenge 1 map. first of all, how the map looks somewhat hurts my eyes from the overview. but thats fine. With the KSS nat style this map is rather nice with an expected air base early game its fairly good. solid map, though I'm not much of a fan of it. Its good.
Extraction With that rouge siegetank being removeed I like the map. decoration seems rather meh but I know it'll be better. and the layout allows for early game options into late game options. Good map for themusic. something I expect.
Lotus This pretty map is something I'd like to see on the ladder. with a bridge behind the gold base as a way to open up the map if you decide to mine it is nice while having good attack paths allowing for aggression and defense easily. honestly when looking at these maps my old opinions was covered by the results I seen during the TLMC tourny.
Stasis I like its decoration but top center's air blockers are annoying and fairly large. overlords trying to return or go to the center of the map can get stuck on them forever due to unit AI breaking. also between the nats theres a good terran sieging point/ling runby path. like comon...
besides that not bad map, if its on the ladder I'm fine with it.
Crystalline Addiction The first RMT finalist. With interesting ground rush distance and decoration style I came to like it somewhat now, Though it be equally as fine without the RMT's (which are mainly useless on most maps unless they have an air problem. but that air problem can be fixed by changing the layout to make that problem not as strong."
This map has a great take on using RMT's by not spamming them!
Ritual Moopy Temple Speaking about turret spam... this map would honestly be better in my eyes without the turrets and with all the terrans/tosses throwing units into these turrets with literally 0 time to react and save them is just bad. like due to this turret spam they cannot stop looking at their units 24/7 other wise they lose them and maybe lost the game. to turrets.
besides that fair layout with a nice decoration style. though not enough blood for the moopy blood gods.
Sudden Awakening To be personal, this map was lucky. And got a lot of help from me and other mappers helping the creator make a not bad map. though lurkers can be very powerful and turret spam being handled better than moopy temple this map is not bad at all. Though, its not exactly good either. can be improved during the iteration phase. But until then I'm not sure...
All of this consists of my own opinions and what I've seen. and at any time everything can change and prove me wrong. Thank you for reading and I hope to see you all during the voting phase.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/HOEPe8G.png)
