So, the time has come! Our judges have gone through all 166(!) maps submitted to the competition and has weeded out, what they considered, the 16 best maps.
Before we move on to the announcement, we — the organisers — want to take a moment to thank the mappers first and foremost. While we feel like Team Liquid Map Contest has always been a good idea, it's you — the map makers community — whom elevates a good idea to something truely special. Your commitment to making maps is inspiring and we look forward to see what you come up with in the next TLMC. Even if your map didn't make the top 16 you've still contributed to making SC2 a better place by forcing others to push their skills to the limit.
We would also like to thank our fantastic judges. While it's great to have a few mapmakers helping us out behind the scenes, having pro's give their opinons means a lot to the competitive integrity of the event. Even with WCS Winter raging on, our judges managed to find the time to give us their opinions and for that we will be forever grateful. So if you can take a minute out of your day, please send a "Thank you" message to Puck, PtitDrogo, PengWin, and Winter!
Last, but definitely not least, I want to thank Kantu and AVEX. They've represented the map makers community behind the scenes, helping out with countless administrative tasks that — if not completed — would've made it impossible for the competition to continue. These two have been invaluable for this competition and deserves some recognition.
Before presenting the maps, we want to provide you with two pieces of information:
The order of the maps, below, has been randomized and does not always accurately represent their individual placement after voting.
The voting process is blind. That means that the judges don't know who's map they're judging.
Standard
The standard category was, surprise-surprise, the most popular category in this iteration of TLMC. To enter a map into this category map makers had to design a medium sized map with a rush distance of roughly 40-45 seconds.
Bandwidth
By: themusic246
Expand the perimeters of this digital battleground or hold the forward highground bases to control important chokepoints.
Operation Lockdown
By: IeZaeL
All of the parts and attack paths of the map are connected by small bridges. No attack paths are near each other, making each one very important and different. Players must be extra careful to not get caught offguard when crossing them. Map awareness is key here.
Triton
By: themusic246
Mixture of high and lowground bases on a frozen outpost. A xel'naga tower in the center of the map gives vision of important attack routes. Bundle up!
Ephemeron
By: -NegativeZero-
A series of small bridges and ramps aid in defense and emphasize positional awareness. Destroy the rocks to open up larger, unobstructed attack paths across the high grounds.
Macro
The macro category was made to bring out maps that play a bit slower than those in the "Standard" category. These maps are generally a bit larger and the recommended rush time is 40-55 seconds.
Disco Bloodbath
By: Marras
SC2 goes Disco! Take your place on the dancefloor and show your best moves to take the victory, Be cautious though, as the floor's colorful tiles and flashy lights might interfere with your vision and let your opponent to sneak up on you.
Acropolis
By: RQM
Acropolis is a relatively smaller sized map for macro plays. Vertical third is very close to natural and main. Natural and third both have rocks to help defenses. Middle encourages direct conflicts in early games. Possessing central high ground leads players to victory. Players can take bypassing routes after destroying large rocks.
Black Baroque
By: Zweck
The map is relatively big and the third base is relatively safe to take. The necessary movement path to protect both, the natural and the third is pretty short.
Heatwave
By: themusic246
Choose between an open third and safer fourth, or safer third in open fourth. Bring on the heat.
Challenge #1
In the first challenge of TLMC 12, we asked map makers to design a map utilizing mineral nodes to alter or affect the pathing of units. A bit of a throwback to StarCraft: Brood War.
Thunderbird
By: RQM
Thunderbird is a macro-friendly map with mineral walls. Every reduced mineral nodes in the map is worth '5', allowing workers eliminate them by one trip.
Collision Course
By: IeZaeL
While the layout is purposefully as standard as possible, there are new gameplay elements: Mineral fields that litter the shortest attack path and mineral fields that block other "main" attack paths. Both are minable to open up new ways.
Collision Course is a map inspired by Freakling's well regarded BroodWar map Oxide
Rest Calm
By: Marras
Reduced minerals block the way into the gold base, which also serves as a mineral wall. Mining both of these lines will open up a new pathway to the lowground third.
Loss Aversion
By: -NegativeZero-
You have 3 choices for your 3rd base, including one located behind a row of depleted minerals.
Challenge #2
Here we challenged the community to create a map utilizing the new structure “Inhibitor Zone Generator”, a neutral and invulnerable structures that slows in an AoE, in clever ways.
Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84
By: Superouman
This very small map features three rows of slowing areas that make the initial rush distance longer. As the game progresses, the additional bases make both players much closer which promotes aggressive playstyles.
Mungyeong Saejae
By: RQM
Mungyeong Saejae is a large map for macro games with inhibitor zones attached. Attacker can choose between two paths in front of enemy's natural entrance. One is a wide ridge but with inhibitor zones, and the other path involves LoS blockers.
Break Out
By: ATTx
The map has a deceleration field located in a narrow central alley. You can start by using the moderator, and then you can break the stone to create a new road
Winter's Gate
By: Marras
Winter's Gate is a smallish map with a direct route between the highground thirds. However, Inhibitor Zone Generators are placed along the way to slow down any units that go past them. So whether you are attacking or retreating be sure to be cautious of the path you are choosing.
What's next?
Before we head in to the final vote for TLMC #12 we need these maps to be tested. And for that we need a few pro's and a tournament. Luckily we already have all that set up. The tournament will begin tomorrow, Monday, and you can find all the details in this thread.
Once the tournament has completed we'll also give the top 16 one more chance to refine their maps before the final vote. The final vote is scheduled to start on the 26th of February!
Looks like every Category #1 finalist is just a standard map with a mineral wall slapped at the 3rd and very easy to mine/slapped somewhere where it will never be mined.
Yeah category 1 is a bit disappointing. Also lots of maps here that were barely changed from last TLMC (though the general feeling was that even last TLMC those maps were better than the actual finalists).
There were quite a few resubmissions this time around.
And yea, I felt a similar disappointment for Challenge 1, had alot of high hopes for it, but I was pleasantly surprised with Thunderbird, and I like Collision Course.
I think both Loss Aversion and Calm can get some iteration changes that add more mineral walls in interesting locations to promote the feature.
I just wish the mapmakers and the judges were willing to go for something other than the lowest common denominator. Every is 2-player and 14/16 maps are squares with mains in diagonal corners ...
Thank you to Puck, PtitDrogo, PengWin, and Winter. And Kantu & Avex of course!
Judging TLMC should be self-evident for pros though, since 100% of the maps nowadays that end up on ladder, are actually from there... They are the ones that have to play on them for their living.
Aside from that i like all the finalists, the standard category is especially awesome. Only with the challenge#2 category i wouldnt totally agree. I really like all the Maplayouts in general, only the way the IZGs are placed, i cant understand on Mungyeong Saejae and Winter's Gate. It feels like they're kinda randomly placed and in too many places. Reminds me of the RMTs from last TLMC. I dont really see one of those maps end up on ladder. I feel IZGs needed to be placed gently in 1-2 places with serving a clear purpose (like on "Break Out") and not just being "a bit" everywhere. When there are some IZGs all over the place, it just becomes annyoing to move your army around the map. Its gonna take a lot of apm, that will not be very interesting for viewers since there is interaction with "the map" but not with the opponent. IZGs are such of a big addition to sc2 that i doubt maps that spam them just verywhere a bit will end up on ladder (for now). Maps like that might be cool in the future, when ppl got used to IZGs. But pros hate change, so if we want IZGs to appear on ladder it needs to be in a very gentle way i feel.
But well see how the IZGs will play out in the tournament. Im very curious to see, and might be totally wrong Dont get me wrong i think the challenge#2 maps are still pretty cool maps after all
First off, big thanks to all of the judges, they had a lot of maps to go through.
I really didn't expect to get three of mine to the finalists, but I'm super happy to see my maps do this well. I can't wait to see them played in the tournament! I'm also hoping to see people dance their units on Disco :D
Also, Zweck I originally had fewer IZGs on Winter's Gate but I was instructed to add a few more in the prejudging feedback so I did.
I'm really happy to see three of my maps succeeding into finals! Thanks to hard work done by all of the judges. I really appreciate your works. Now of course I'll try to make my maps into a nice ladder map contenders. I'll reconsider Mungyeong Saejae's number of IZGs too.
On February 10 2019 18:45 opisska wrote: I just wish the mapmakers and the judges were willing to go for something other than the lowest common denominator. Every is 2-player and 14/16 maps are squares with mains in diagonal corners ...
imo it takes far more for a map without a corner main to succeed design wise than one that has a corner base. A non-corner base is a risky feature. Either it's OK or bad. The bad example would be Catallena. Aside from being a 3p map, it brings out the point of why these bases are potentially bad. Corner bases on the other hand on 2p maps are without risk, always OK. We have yet to reach a point point where these bases and their dominance are viewed as creating worse games somehow, and I don't think we'll reach that point for 5+ years.
Non-corner bases can still be fine, it's just that because of the risk that goes into them you need to have a very solid map outside of it. Sometimes it works eventually (?) like with neon violet square. The current pool has automaton, so we'll see how that one goes. So far I've seen a lot of low-quality games on automaton because of the combination of the exposed main and far-away 3rd, but probably some good games out there. Didn't watch enough. But NVS seems way better than automaton in that it had more interesting expansion choices and more defensive tools.
Normally you'll end up seeing more corner maps just because they're also very good and can create good games just as well. Making a solid non-corner base map takes a lot of skill/luck, but when it does succeed i guess it's cool. No need to push hard against corner bases just for the sake of it tho. If a map pool of 7 has 1 or 2 maps with non-corner bases that's good. As long as they're good maps.
About 3p/4p. This one is brought up a lot before. One can get all the benefits of 3/4 player maps with good 2p map design. 2p maps allow for more interesting corner base layout and more variety in midfield design. 4p maps have multiple maps in one which might sound fun. But it's really bad for competitive integrity since some spawn setups are better than others (Waystation, Catallena, Frost, Deadwing).
2 of 16 maps being off-corner isn't that bad of a statistic. Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84 is also using an airspace-nudged corner base instead of a perfect one, another way to do things. Something like Proxima Station could also work, even without an in-base natural. Still plenty of room for options and designs on 2p maps. For now it would seem like non-corner bases often need to be paired with large maps or in-base naturals, or you need to have a relatively easily accessible path for the 1234 if you want to use an off-corner main.
Congrats all! I tried to submit some wacky maps (aka not cookie cutter) this TLMC for the most part, too bad... :x
I could go in and nit-pick these maps, but ehhh, my motivation for sc2 has been shot lately (unfortunately) so instead, I'll shrug off my loss and say congratulations to the winners!
Playing incredibly safe yet again, i feel like this judge team needs more diversity, too many conservatives clearly! Overall a lot of boring maps and that you can make the finalists of the challenge categories while barely using the special mechanic is rather questionable.
On February 11 2019 00:21 The_Red_Viper wrote: [...]and that you can make the finalists of the challenge categories while barely using the special mechanic is rather questionable.
It's not, though. We even included notes about that in the announcement post. Blizzard doesn't want the maps submitted to be riddled with the new features. It's supposed to spice up the map a little bit, not completely overtake it.
On February 11 2019 00:21 The_Red_Viper wrote: [...]and that you can make the finalists of the challenge categories while barely using the special mechanic is rather questionable.
It's not, though. We even included notes about that in the announcement post. Blizzard doesn't want the maps submitted to be riddled with the new features. It's supposed to spice up the map a little bit, not completely overtake it.
Well there is a disconnect in our understanding of spicing things up then, i am not saying that every single map falls victim to this, but just as one example: break out hardly uses the feature for anything meaningful
Crap mappool. I saw many of the maps i can make you a new mappool which would be the coolest ever just shows the work of the guys here. An important fact. There was super cool 4player maps but AVEX was a judge so he hates them thats why none of this cool maps arrived into the finalists mappool im pretty sure. Blizzard please check out this maps. The story that i can make another mappool with complete different maps and it would be the best one shows the quality of the judges it seems TL is not able to do this anymore. Blizzard pls last time i wont repeat it again: DO IT FOR YOURSELF INTEGRATE THE COMMUNITY TO BRING THE POSSIBLE BEST VOTING!!! All players should be able to judge the maps so the best decision making would be done by the community thats the wiseness of the masses maybe u heard about it. So the more people can decide the better quality result u will gain. I think with this contest and the amount of really cool maps i saw and the amount of the cool maps in here which was kinda expected is like 3 or 4 you really can say they are not worth it any longer to judge the maps. I Miss a lot of cool maps i saw. They have choosen the most standart maps the most boring looking ones where they make the less mistakes with - in their mind. Someone said it less diversity. I dont expect cool maps from avex to be honest. The most interessting maps was not part of it there was maps with super interessting dynamics and guys with really cool ideas but TL IS AFRAID TO DECIDE FOR SOMETHING instead of this we get the most boring maps IM ABSOLUTLY DONE WITH U. JUST JOKE THANKS FOR FUCKING UP MY Sc2 experience again. Sorry for the mapmakers with the cool ideas to all of you u did a SUPER GREAT JOB!!!! i saw many of them and felt ur cool ideas the mapmakers was really creative in what they were doing. Not the first time i saw great maps going down and then some seasons later they pop up from nowhere like cerulean falls. PLS CANCEL TEAMLQIUID MAPCONTEST 4EVER I CANT SEE IT ANYMORE. Thanks for this boring maps guys great job!!! keet it low!!! And seriously whos responsible for Disco Bloodbath? you better shame yourself!!! I can tell you what u can choose: Triton, Acropolis, Thunderbird, Bandwidth and Black Barouqe maybe Collision Course and Mungyeong Saejae or Operation Lockdown - thats mostly it. The rest are pretty much standart maps with here and there some nice looking and thats it shid we are used 2 anyways just standart 2 player crap maps with 7 bases + and just some bad design layouts and just boring to watch for what good maps exist. At least im glad to see no rush maps anymore.
On February 10 2019 23:28 Weavel wrote: I really miss Frost and Whirlwind... I guess it's the age of endless 2 spawn corner maps.
Indeed, Im sad aswell, but the gameplay in LotV atm isnt really allowing for them I want to be proven wrong tho, as I actually kinda enjoy scouting in 4p maps ( Dont enjoy getting 13/12'd in 4p maps tho x.x)
On February 11 2019 00:21 The_Red_Viper wrote: Playing incredibly safe yet again, i feel like this judge team needs more diversity, too many conservatives clearly! Overall a lot of boring maps and that you can make the finalists of the challenge categories while barely using the special mechanic is rather questionable.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't sort of situation.
Also I was very against maps that barely used the feature, and fought against it, but it's based off highest average scores /shrug
I quite like a lot of these picks! I have high hopes for Thunderbird, Collision Course, Mungyeong Saejae, Break Out, and Heatwave - I think they're going to have great gameplay. While some of the other map picks were more conservative than I would have liked, they are a huge improvement from the last TLMC top 16 in my opinion. Nice job judges, especially the mappers who I assume pushed for some of the more creative picks in the results!
I am worried that the combination of safe and dense expansions with small, choked middles is contributing to Protoss being so powerful right now, but there isn't much that can be done about that because everybody is making that type of map. We'll have to see if Blizz responds with a balance patch or if it balances out in the meta. I don't think that these TLMC maps are (unfortunately) going to improve the specific balance of PvX.
Edit: It is too bad to only see one map make use of a HY geyser and only one additional map with a gold base. Though, that does reflect on the fact that there were many players/pros on the judging panel. It would have been cool to see some usage of half bases (in-bases, back-doors, islands, half-base aggressive expos, etc.) but maybe we will in the future.
Disappointed I didn't make any finals this time, but I like a lot of the maps that were chosen. I think the standard maps in particular are much more appealing this time around. GL going into the voting and congrats to all y'all!
@NewSunshine yea i actually liked Cryptic Link a lot, maybe too many pathways.. but i thought it was a nice layout and would make it through. Good maps as usual.
snippy comments from people who aren't mapmakers about how the mapmakers aren't "creative" enough followed by a gigantic Snute rebuttal? it's TLMC time again
On February 11 2019 00:21 The_Red_Viper wrote: Playing incredibly safe yet again, i feel like this judge team needs more diversity, too many conservatives clearly! Overall a lot of boring maps and that you can make the finalists of the challenge categories while barely using the special mechanic is rather questionable.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't sort of situation.
On February 11 2019 11:53 brickrd wrote: snippy comments from people who aren't mapmakers about how the mapmakers aren't "creative" enough followed by a gigantic Snute rebuttal? it's TLMC time again
x) and then in a few weeks or months from now we'll have a bunch of eu pros that didn't judge whining on twitter about the new wcs map pool
On February 11 2019 11:53 brickrd wrote: snippy comments from people who aren't mapmakers about how the mapmakers aren't "creative" enough followed by a gigantic Snute rebuttal? it's TLMC time again
x) and then in a few weeks or months from now we'll have a bunch of eu pros that didn't judge whining on twitter about the new wcs map pool
My favorite was when a certain Terran player called Dreamcatcher "the worst map ever made"
On February 11 2019 11:53 brickrd wrote: snippy comments from people who aren't mapmakers about how the mapmakers aren't "creative" enough followed by a gigantic Snute rebuttal? it's TLMC time again
x) and then in a few weeks or months from now we'll have a bunch of eu pros that didn't judge whining on twitter about the new wcs map pool
dont worry ill just spam tweet the multiple times i asked for judges and tell them to stfu
Bandwidth: Bandwidth does the Coda thing, but adds to it a high base and choke density which I'm not sure work too well. The rocked bridge is well placed generally speaking, but it feels like there's a ton of good attack paths anyways from the fourth base (in front of the main). This map isn't particularly compelling, but it also isn't 'bad'. The French expression "c'est pas terrible" sums it up.
Operation Lockdown: I liked the map quite a bit at first glance, but the more I look at it the more I see issues. This is exactly the type of map that mapmakers love and then turns out to not to be very good at all. The exposed natural gases might be fine just because of how long the far attack path is. However the four centre bases don't look very viable. My guess is the whole Eastwatch-esque (without vision blocking) setup in the middle with small chokes and open areas probably doesn't work as well as on Eastwatch since this map isn't completely gigantic. Maybe taking four bases with the clockwise third and the closest center base just works and I'm wrong though. A bit unsure about this one.
Triton: I like this map quite a bit. The 'centre' bases are quite a strong position for either the attacker or the defender, but that's fine. Many of the gases of the bases feel a bit in the way of the action. Feels like a good opportunity to use high yield gases (especially for the third immediately adjacent to the main where the terrain is kinda distorted to allow for a passage around the gases).
Ephemeron: This is also a map that mapmakers will have a tendency to like better than it actually is, but I can't find too many concrete flaws with it. Only one possible third to expand to isn't the norm. nowadays, but that's not necessarily a problem. The three bridges in the middle is the obvious point of interest. I find myself liking the map less once the rocks are down since armies just kinda move around the central square. The middle is rather narrow so it has quite a bit of split-map ultra-late game potential.
Disco Bloodbath: I sure hope there won't be too many battles around this centre, because the players will end up blind. Apart from that the rocks are placed kinda haphazardly, and the middle is overly choked up. Some of the bases feel really gratuitous like the one stuck right between the two other ones in the top right/bottom left. Really not a fan of this layout overall.
Acropolis: The third on this map is really easy, which happens to be what the category demands, but it's probably too easy. The centre of the map gives good pressure on the lowground fourth and makes the 12/6 o'clock bases very hard to take, but doesn't really hinder someone just expanding all the way vertically at all. The watchtower are nice places to fight about and make it look like things are happening before the map inevitably forces a long and drawn out macro game. I'm exaggerating a bit, but this map is generally fine but too safe.
Black Baroque: This third is very close and also too safe. This extends to the entire top right/bottom left corners being incredibly safe. Yet again the watchtower is well uses as a double edge offensive/defensive tool, but things are definitely heavily favouring the defender. The rocks covering half the ramp on the corner base are the equivalent of someone adding a combination lock on something they placed in their bank vault. The main does have a very reasonable amount of surface area at least. Yet again the layout is essentially rock solid, but caters very heavily to the defender.
Heatwave: This map looks like a reasonable middle of the road macro map. The fact that some races want to expand linearly clockwise for the first four bases, but then the next four on this side of the map are located counterclockwise is a bit awkward, but manageable. The corner bases aren't the most exciting thing in the world.
Thunderbird: Otherwise the fact that all the small minerals are worth five is very interesting and should make for some novel gameplay. A lot of things that seem quite bad at first glance like the three bases behind a single choke and the awkward rush distances are all rendered somewhat moot by the fact that they're all worth five. This is a map I really don't know how it will work, and am excited to find out. The double rich vespene geysers are a pretty bad idea though even if realistically the central bases are very hard to take.
Collision Course: The natural mineral line looks pretty vulnerable. The base placement just looks awkward if you just look at it without considering the minerals. And then if you factor back in the presence of the minerals it remains awkward. The middle is narrowed by the minerals which is great, but then the way around that choke is really long. Not a fan of the map overall.
Rest Calm: The mineral wall is truly completely irrelevant to the overall map. This is bad on two counts: a map shouldn't have irrelevant features, and a map shouldn't get through in a challenge category if it has nothing to do with the challenge. Apart from that I don't like the map much even if you discount the fact that it was supposed to be using mineral walls. The natural is very awkwardly shaped which allows for a large surface of attack and a vulnerable ramp. The base below the main and adjacent to the natural essentially can't be expanded to due to where the ramp is placed, and overall this layout isn't very good.
Loss Aversion: The minerals matter more here than on Rest Calm, but it's still a pretty awful challenge #1 attempt. The map's layout is pretty decent discounting the mineral wall though. If Blueshift was Catalyst's twin brother, this is at least an inbred cousin, but hey if it works it works. If this map makes it onto ladder at the same time as Disco Bloodbath I'll assume Blizzard was paid off by a LASIK consortium.
Neo Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84: The Inhibitor Zone usage is pretty basic, but that's reasonable for a new feature being used. Less of a fan of the layout which basically is a bunch of straight lines from top left to bottom right or of the corners. The layout does accentuate the importance of the Inhibitor Zoned corridor, but it also plays against it, since there aren't many decisions to make about whether to go through it. The center bases probably won't be taken often and it'll be interesting to see how strong terran pushes straight down the center using the inhibitor zones as cover will be in TvZ.
Mungyeong Saejae: The use of inhibitor zones is pretty messy and could certainly be better, but it's still seems intriguing in the way it offsets the advantage of high ground. The layout stands by itself, but also works with the inhibitor zones.
Break Out: Not only does this map manage to not use the Inhibitor Zone in any meaningful way, it also happens to make the map slightly worse by including the Inhibitor Zone. The map itself is interesting--linear third a bit far/hard to defend and a few other issues like that (plus the obvious possibility of two armies passing each other by quite easily, but regardless it's a dubious judging decision to make this map (as well as Rest Calm and Loss Aversion) finalists. At that point why bother with categories
Winter's Gate: This map has both a reasonably simple and clean application of the Inhibitor Zones, and also important decision-making around the zones. The middle ground is significant but not mandatory due to the passages to the side of the middle. The Inhibitor Zones against drops are cute too. I think the corners could be better, but overall the map is still pretty solid, and the one of the four that to my mind best showcases the use of inhibitor zones.
The judges mostly did a pretty good job of avoiding awful and very obviously mediocre maps this time though, so props there. Here's a (somewhat arbitrary since things were pretty close) ranking because I know no one will read this wall of text:
1. Winter's Gate 2. Thunderbird (probably too high but fueled by optimism) 3. Triton 4. Ephemeron 5. Mungyeong Saejae 6. Heatwave 7. Black Baroque 8. Acropolis 9. Operation Lockdown (could move quite a bit depending on what I see in map tournament) 10. Bandwidth 11. Disco Bloodbath 12. Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise 13. Collision Course
Neo Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84: The Inhibitor Zone usage is pretty basic, but that's reasonable for a new feature being used. Less of a fan of the layout which basically is a bunch of straight lines from top left to bottom right or of the corners. The layout does accentuate the importance of the Inhibitor Zoned corridor, but it also plays against it, since there aren't many decisions to make about whether to go through it. The center bases probably won't be taken often and it'll be interesting to see how strong terran pushes straight down the center using the inhibitor zones as cover will be in TvZ.
For the central corridor, i think there is still a choice because of what the paths offer to the attacker. The choices will change depending on where both players take their 3rd base. + Show Spoiler +
I spent quite a lot of time just on the placement and the size of the IZG in front of the natural because i was thinking about long range units from the attacker. This is why the IZG is large and doesn't cover the path just in front of the natural but a lot of the path near the middle.
Nice maps overall from what I've seen so far in the map test tournament. Seeing this new movement inhibitor thing made me think of a new concept for bases, extremely safe to take but there's an inhibitor on the minerals. Makes it as a last resort base for when you're contained with way too many workers or as a late-game little extra income would make it nice.
Neo Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84: The Inhibitor Zone usage is pretty basic, but that's reasonable for a new feature being used. Less of a fan of the layout which basically is a bunch of straight lines from top left to bottom right or of the corners. The layout does accentuate the importance of the Inhibitor Zoned corridor, but it also plays against it, since there aren't many decisions to make about whether to go through it. The center bases probably won't be taken often and it'll be interesting to see how strong terran pushes straight down the center using the inhibitor zones as cover will be in TvZ.
For the central corridor, i think there is still a choice because of what the paths offer to the attacker. The choices will change depending on where both players take their 3rd base. + Show Spoiler +
I spent quite a lot of time just on the placement and the size of the IZG in front of the natural because i was thinking about long range units from the attacker. This is why the IZG is large and doesn't cover the path just in front of the natural but a lot of the path near the middle.
Of course there are still some attack paths, but the feeling I got is that the attack paths are predicated on all the regular stuff--expo, army positioning, and not so much the IZGs themselves.
On one hand the 'rush' category produced no good maps, and the 'new' category didn't produced all that many (New Gettysburg was good, Neon Violet and Sequencer were decent).
On the other hand, now there is no place at all in the TLMC map contest for maps that are non-standard, and maps that are slightly innovative and can slot in standard/macro get thrown out for not being standard enough. And the challenges haven't yet produced any good maps (all of those from TLMC11 were quite bad, and the jury is still out on these ones), so there aren't any results backing the assertion that challenges are better.
In TLMC11, only one challenge map got used (Stasis). It is unfortunate that none of the others that had the natural pointing towards the middle got used.
And for TLMC12, most of the standard and macro maps have a very similar structure of the five first bases (+ Show Spoiler +
) and the middle with many paths that go in all directions. It is clear that any map that strays a little bit have low chances to get through even if it seems to have a minor imbalance. (I'm so so glad Ephemeron got through). If that trend continues for the standard and macro categories, i don't see any point of having the two normal categories in future TLMCs because blizzard could easily take one map, change height variations and open/close paths here and there. Then, they will end up with multiple slightly different maps that will be good enough for ladder.
Even the challenge maps have that same map structure. All of these are standard/macro maps that have the challenge features slapped on them. If you removed the challenge features out of them, some could even become finalists of the regular categories. There are only two maps that completely break if the challenge features are removed: - Loss Aversion: the natural choke would become far too wide. - Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84: The rush distance would be far below the acceptable threshold.
The challenge categories are supposed to be more experimental but in the end, they are quite standard. To my eyes, this is a failure for the challenge categories and what it brings isn't worth the removal of the New category. At least in the New category, the judges seem naturally inclined to slightly reduce their balance tolerance for innovative maps. It is really that bad to have one or two maps where we take the risk of having a 55-60% imbalance for unique maps?
There is one another big thing for the come back of the New category. The challenge categories bring new mechanics on the table. They are release just before or at the start of a TLMC. These are features that we don't know how players truly interact with them. We have one month to make maps with them, we barely have any play testing to adapt our maps and we end up making average maps that end up finalists. Some of these get into the ladder and we can see hundreds on stream with these maps. We will see many players interact with Inhibitor Zone Generations in the next months and some of us may have an epiphany on how to use an IZG in an excellent way. Guess what, it will never get through standard/macro categories because it's not standard enough and the challenge categories will have a different theme. If he has to wait for the next time an IZG category is announced, it will take so many years and the meta may change that will make his map worse.
This is why judges should allow more experimentation in challenge categories and we should bring back the New category.
Adding to that, there are ideas that are novel yet aren't broad enough to deserve their own category. For example the map that Superouman made with the Line of Sight blockers that also block air units' sight was pretty cool, but I wouldn't want an entire category of maps like that. As a matter of a fact I don't think I'd want an entire category of maps with Renegade Missile Turrets either...
On February 17 2019 01:26 Superouman wrote: We will see many players interact with Inhibitor Zone Generations in the next months and some of us may have an epiphany on how to use an IZG in an excellent way. Guess what, it will never get through standard/macro categories because it's not standard enough and the challenge categories will have a different theme. If he has to wait for the next time an IZG category is announced, it will take so many years and the meta may change that will make his map worse.
This is why judges should allow more experimentation in challenge categories and we should bring back the New category.
Hard to argue with that. A "New" category that collectively has rmt's, izg's, adjustable minerals, "rush" maps, and whatever other new toys blizz puts in galaxy would give map makers less restriction and more than a few weeks to play with special features from previous tlmc's. Sounds hot. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think the biggest issue is that there isn't enough time between announcement and submissions for newer features, whereas everyone can endlessly practice Standard and Macro TLMC after TLMC and have submissions ready.
There's also some issues with how maps are picked too in judging that I was yelling at Kantuva about for a solid hour that really annoyed me and prevented maps with more unique usage of the features from being in the finalists.
Standard boring maps are fine, since you can just play some standard starcraft 2 on them, but it is fun to have unusual maps, especially as a viewer. It just makes the tournaments way better when you have like 2 maps that are unique.
Finally finished watching the VODs. There were lots of good games this time despite all the Nyduses, and there was a lot to takeaway from seeing pros play on new maps. The thirds players expanded to was sometimes not the third I expected them too (even if we exclude Zest who expanded to the aggressive base all the time), and in some cases taking those thirds was probably incorrect. And the pros seemed to treat the mineral walls as indestructible walls more often than not (partially because I don't think even the pros know how to handle mineral walls optimally, and partially because this challenge hasn't been very successful imo).
So here's my updated impressions about the maps.
Bandwidth: No change.
Operation Lockdown: I'm still a bit unsure about this, since we didn't get to see any lategame, but I'm more confident that the middle four bases won't get taken. Attacks on the linear third are a bit problematic since the surround distance is so long.
Triton: Protosses repeatedly messed up walling off on this map is definitely a problem, but apart from that this map was decent. The middle played pretty well. Definitely more of a macro map than a standard map (the comparisons to Para Site are obvious), but if Eastwatch can count as a standard map, so can anything. The way all the finalists trend rather macro is more of a systemic problem than just an issue with Triton though.
Ephemeron: Ephemeron had several quite good games, and certainly stood out due to its layout being different from all the other maps. The bridges were gameplay relevant, and army movements around the center were more compelling than I'd anticipated. The split-map 'problem' is real I think, but it's no Backwater either.
Disco Bloodbath: The top right and bottom left corner of the map which I criticized earlier might as well not have existed during all the games. The middle of the map was also essentially never used. Map was generally not great.
Acropolis: Wardi compared the map to Ascension to Aiur, and it is basically that except with a much safer third. Even the fourths played very safe. Some of the PvZs were quite good, but this is another map that feels too macro focused to be balanced.
Black Baroque: The exposed-ish main is more of a reasonable weakness than I expected, and the slightly elongated choke leading to between the natural and third did allow for some attacking. So the map is less overly macro focused than I thought, though it's still a bit too defensive for my taste. I do also have to give the map some credit for featuring the best game of the tournament (Impact vs Zest).
Heatwave: The games were generally pretty good on this map.
Thunderbird: This map heavily disappointed (though my evaluation of it initially was pretty off base). Part of it can be attributed to the players (the minerals in the middle were not taken down in most of the games, and it feels like it should have been correct for at least one of the players to mine the central path), but it's also due to the layout being very turtly. The double mineral walls to the expos were mined out to expand by soO and Impact in some games, but there just weren't any offensive opportunities from the mineral wall side which meant a free three bases (when players didn't unaccountably expand vertically).
Collision Course: No one abused the natural gas being exposed to my surprise, but no one mined the minerals either. Given that the mineral walls were essentially real walls, I'm more wondering about how narrow chokes in the middle of the map can viably be. It's true that battles rarely happen in the dead center of the map. I didn't think the games on this map were generally very good.
Rest Calm: The mineral wall was mined once (which was once more than I expected it to be mined) though it did take all the other expansions being taken first and even then Impact unaccountably tried to mine the gold from the other side. The natural's shape and the third adjacent to the main wasn't abuse as hard as I thought it would be--some players even expanded to that third. I still don't think this is a good map (even ignoring the fact that it only qualifies for this category on paper).
Loss Aversion: MC did mine the mineral wall once to expand on the other side though no one else did. 55 minerals is a lot. The mineral wall did enable a lot of proxy reapers tbf.
Neo Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84: There were a lot of pushes straight down the middle through the Inhibitor Zones since there aren't that many other paths to take. Army movement wasn't very interesting on this map.
Mungyeong Saejae: The inhibitor zone usage ended up being somewhat marginal on this map, but more importantly the map itself felt too large and sprawling even without the inhibitor zones.
Break Out: The inhibitor zones didn't matter at all as expected, and in fact the middle diamond wasn't used much. There were some very interesting holds at the very distant vertical third, but here too the corners (and most of the map) never ended up getting used.
Winter's Gate: The only good map of all the challenge maps. The layout was good, the inhibitor zones ended up mattering (especially the one in front of the third and those next to the main), and the games too were pretty good.
11. Mungyeong Saejae 12. Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84 13. Collision Course 14. Disco Bloodbath 15. Break Out 16. Rest Calm
It feels like this map contest there weren't any truly 'bad' maps, but the challenge maps fell very flat, and overall the maps were (as usual) way too macro-heavy which means that terran gets shafted. I'm not sure if you can build a reasonable map pool out of these maps.
Neo-Tokyo Turbo Cruise '84 is such a fantastic name. It also looks pretty neat too.
On the "These are all 2 player map" thing, this is pretty much necessary. 4 player maps without forced cross spawns tend to cause some matchups to be quite unevenly balanced.
I've been watching 2016 GSL, which had multiple 4 player maps, and too often who would win depended too much on spawn position. Terran would almost always win if they got close horizontal spawns against zerg in such a way that zerg could not expand to their closest third. Terran would tank push the natural and drop the far third and often there was nothing zerg could do to stop it because they would have to split their forces too much, whereas had they spawned cross positions or vertical, the game would have been much closer. Likewise, if Protoss scouted zerg last and zerg early pooled, it was often a build-order loss for the protoss since zerg could overlord scout one base and drone scout the other and find protoss just as the pool finished. 4 player maps tend to create a lot of poor quality games because of this type of stuff.
You would think that since TLMC is the only tournament for mappers that matters that it would be flawless or at least close to it but instead you get maps that truthfully aren't the best of the best and either win because...well, truthfully I have no clue why they win...? Good aesthetics? Random dice rolls? Because it's made by IeZaeL? Either way, shit reasons...
Look at many of the standard/macro maps which are """good""". These maps have ""unique"" layouts and great flow yet it really makes you ponder because after a second look, after loading the map into the editor and trying them out, why..., why oh why is this map one of the "best" maps that deserves to win TLMC?
So, I look at all the maps and truly try to focus on why this map is good. I look at the layout, the map size, the pathways and the base layout and try to think how all the matchups will play out on the map and overall, after the entire gameplan has played out in my head, I analyze the map and go... Holy shit... This map is... (Insert Compliment or Expletive!!!)
Suddenly we all go Oprah Winfrey and start handing out finalist spots! Good job on submitting, you get a finalist spot! And you get a finalist spot! And you get one!!! And you do too!!!! Whoa, congrats!!! Your map blows ass but because you actually submit to our contest, you get a silver trophy no matter what!! Get enough votes and maybe, just maybe you'll get the gold!!! (ps, spend $5 and get platinum guaranteed!)
Anyway, onto the maps and why they are or are not good... Yup, let the rage/annoyance/anger commence!
Bandwidth is just CODA/Muspelheim rotated 90 degrees. (IeZaeL copycat map lol, sure this kid is good at aesthetics but has he ever created a single map which was original/legit? News flash... Nope!) Music246 is a good mapper, very good actually, but this map, waaay too boring. It's like the very same joke where people say open up map XYZ, rotate it 90 degrees and resubmit it... In this case, congrats, you did it music246! Muspelheim... Coda... err, I mean, Bandwidth!!! Nice job!
Operation Lockdown has far 3rds, too aggressive middle bases which will never get used and boring corners...but hey, IeZaeL map, instant finalist!!!
Ephemeron is actually really good and even though you're limited to a single 3rd base it offers different paths for a 4th (aggressive or defensive) but hey, it's a Negative Zero map so of course it's good.
Last standard map is Triton which isn't too bad, although the map layout, the base layout and the overall pathways (NE/SW corners & bases which are garbage) make it not that great. A good standard map means the whole map is worthwhile and will get used, this map...those corners, ugh. Also the forward bases are pretty exposed and open which means it'll be really hard for any race (maybe mech terran / pfort??) to hold it successfully?
So, since my opinion on Standard maps are done and unless we get another Muspelheim clone or Negative Zero wins more finalist spots.... many of these maps won't be very well received. With those failures, now we look at the macro maps...
Acropolis, whoa... Whoa, whoa whoa! This map...is actually not bad at all! Holy shit, we actually have a map that should be a finalist? Way to go RMQ! Congrats! After a bunch of failures, it's nice to finally get a map that is worthwhile and hopefully going forward we get more and more actual good maps...
Continuing on a high note... we have none other than Disco Bloodbath which is...err, well, complete garbage, a boring 3rd, an abusible vertical 3rd, a shit load of air space with the main and completely worthless NE/SW corner bases? Sweet! Epic, macro map brosssss but hey, it's large and has many bases sooo, MACRO!!! Zzzz....
Yeah, strike 1. Next winner...
Just kidding! Black Baroquehq, the map that should be a finalist in the macro cat..catego...category... errr, well...You thought we'd continue with good maps but surprise, we get Black Baroquehq! Main>Nat>3rd isn't terrible (assuming horizontal 3rd.) The triangle third is super far away and exposed. The horizontal 3rd and 4th mineral lines are so smashed into one another they have no room to maneuver and the eight bases in the NE and SW corners are complete and utter garbage. But hey, if you make a map big enough and spam bases over and over again and make an appealing aesthetic then guess what, you can win TLMC as well!
Heat Wave...! Holy shit, heat wave! Finally! Christ almighty, themusic246!!! A good freaking macro map!!!! Not much air space in the map, choice of thirds, pathways all around the map, chokes and large paths, abusible bases, what? It's like the judges finally randomed a good map out of their picks! Cheers!
After the Standard and Macro maps we get into the other maps which...well, truth be told, don't really matter. These maps have """challenges""" which... LOL, are pathetic! They make terrible maps and truthfully will never get onto ladder so what's the point? I get it, challenges are "fun" but they don't create good maps, especially when you force styles out. Also, what TL reader will ever vote a challenge map to win it all... Yup, that doesn't happen! Think about it. Nahhhh... you voted that same damn Standard map everybody else did so grats to that fucker for winning the prize pot!!
Thunderbird - truthfully, it's not bad at all. It does the whole main, nat and third that hugs in a triangle layout with a defensible position well, although the mineral placement is freaking terrible. So very bad, ughhh. Look at that triangular third, wtf is that? Also, what's the point of limiting a potential 4th base?? Right now, you force everybody to take the forward low-ground 4th and with that, gg, nice try, that's boring, limiting expansions isn't good. But when your map isn't that good, add low yield resources on a "macro" map and GG you may stand a chance to win the challenge category!!!
Collision_Course - I don't even know...wait, I do. It's another IeZaeL map, GG he wins!!!! Holy shit, this map doesn't do anything with mineral walls at all besides a random path in the middle which will never get used? But hey, it's a standard map with some random mineral walls...LEGIT! For fuck sake, stop sucking IeZaeL's nuts and finally realize his maps aren't god's next gift. PS. Any 3rd is super open, the main is super exposed and the wall-off for any type of 3rd is extremely open, however this map """won""" a mineral wall map. How does that make any sense?? Oh, nevermind, IeZaeL!
Rest_Calm - This is all I have to say, look at that natural and look at the triangular 3rd. Park a lib, park a siege, park a lurker, park anything with fucking range and you're gone. But hey, attack the nat and then blink up into the main because LOL EXPOSED!!!! How did this win? Wait, I know why! Because, MINERAL FIELDS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MAP!!!!!1111 Yeah... For a map that is "Proficient" at mineral walls, this map is... wow. Complete and utter garbage. Next.
There's a reason I say Negative Zero is the best mapper in the community and this map does it. Loss Aversion, a map, with mineral walls that..well, guess what, actually has a pro/con! It makes the natural easier but also makes your main more exposed! (unless you control it and have vision!) You have a forward 3rd unless you mine your natural wall out and take the more defensive 3rd. Honestly, the natural mineral lines should be pushed up horizontal/vertical 2 or 3 hexes but still, Negative is the best mapper and he's proving it again! This map is one of the top maps of this tournament, good job judges, actually voting a map into the finalist spot that actually deserves it!!
Now, we get to maps which are so worthwhile because they have slow fields, maps which are the best of the best because they utilize these slow fields and truly make sure they are something the player never expected...
Just kidding, let's start with Neo Tokyo!!! It's basically a normal map but guess what... if you rush through the middle, it takes a whole 8 seconds longer to rush!!! because... SLOW FIELDS!!!!!! The rest of the map is completely standard and normal, there isn't anything special with it, BUT...BUT!!! if you rush the middle, if you bypass the entire outside, if you ignore every other path, because of the slow fields, it takes 8 seconds longer to reach your base!
BOOYA! CHALLENGE 2 WINNER!!!!
So, continuing with the Neo-Tokyo standard, what happens if we make a better standard map and place the slow fields in even better spots!!! What happens then? Well... Welcome to Mungyeong Saejae!!! The main attack path doesn't even walk through slow fields and truthfully the slow fields don't make any difference at all in the map... But hey, it's a great standard/macro map, so if we just shit a few slow fields in for the """challenge requirement""" then congratulations, TLMC winner!!! Zzzz
I don't even want to talk about Break Out. Let's add two random slow fields in the middle of a giant macro map and guess what... WINNER of the category!!!!!! The entire corners of the map blow ass (NE and SW corners), the golds are... wtf??? Let's randomly add watchtowers because...why not? and last but not least, let's force players into a 4th because the other one is so far away and extremely exposed. But hey, SLOW FIELDS!!!! on a macro map!!! Winner!!!
Last but not least... Winter's Gate by Marras and as I want to rage at this map, I start to look at the flow, the base layout and the usage of slow fields and I'm like...whoa. This is a map that is...well, truthfully... wtf??? Good for challenge #2! Sure there are only 6 slow fields but no matter what way you attack from unless you go way out of your way you'll be attacking into a slow field. If you attack into the third and unless you take out rocks/go up a ramp you have to move in a slow field. Who would have thunk, Marras did things well! Congrats!
PS. This post was written and posted with a little help from the lovely alcoholic beverage known as rum. So yeah, it may be a lot more hostile than it should be! haha <3. Either way... Enjoy folks!