After a longer than usual submission phase and an in-depth judging, we now have what we consider to be the best 16 maps submitted to the 13th edition of the TL.net Map Contest. We saw a slight decrease in submissions this time around but the quality was, as per usual, very high. Some maps just barely missed the cutoff for the top 16, so don't feel discouraged if your map didn't make it this time around. Keep working on it and we'll, hopefully, see your submission in the next TLMC.
For now there's not a lot to do for participants and fans wanting to get your voices heard. As the judging phase is quite theoretical, we now need to get some players to test them out. So this Tuesday, July 2nd, Wardi will kick off the TLnet Map Contest Tournament, his map contest tournament. It will run throughout the week, with the finals being played on Sunday.
After this, we'll give the finalists a chance to put some final touches on their maps before we move onto the public voting phase on the 15th of July. See you all again, then!
Standard
The standard category is a staple of the mapmaking contest. It's the most popular category, by far, and for good reason. A standard map challenges a mapmaker to stand out without using any special tools. It's a completely even playing field. 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.
Simulacrum
By: -NegativeZero-This standard map provides the usual complement of chokes, open areas, and choices of expansion. Defend the central bridges, or control the forward high ground bases as a late game focal point.
Biosphere
By: -NegativeZero- Though the initial 3 base setup is very standard, Biosphere's layout encourages more of a top vs bottom split than the diagonal situation common in other maps. The direct scouting/attack path passes through 3 LoS blocked chokes, allowing for ambushes and encouraging players to explore the various other, more open, paths. Pairs of destructible rocks along the map edges force attention towards the central low ground earlier in the game, while making the outlying bases slightly safer to take.
Ever Dream
By: MarrasThe map has 16 blue bases, two of which have a single rich gas geyser. The average rush distance is 37s. There are rocks in the middle path and on the ramp leading into the lowground third. Line of sight blockers are situated in the 11 & 5 o’clock positions on the outer path of the map an in the highround near them in addition to the direct middle. Main bases not directly in the corner.
Earthrise
By: Superouman Average sized map with a simple expansion layout. Rocks can be taken down to reduce the distance between the players.
Nightshade
By: Marras The map has 14 blue bases and an average rush distance of 36s. There are rocks at both thirds and on one of the ramps leading through the middle highground areas. Two sets of line of sight blockers are located the 1 & 7 o’clock positions.
Macro
While the the macro category shares some similarities with the "Standard" category, we've challenged mapmakers to design a slower playing map where players feel safe to expand. These maps are generally a bit larger and the recommended rush time is 40-55 seconds.
Eternal Empire
By: Superouman A modern interpretation of Cloud Kingdom. Even though the map isn’t as huge as other macro maps, most of the expansions are easy to secure. The first three bases have small chokes which helps surviving early attacks. The xel naga tower near the middle helps the players to cover more paths and expansions.
Cloud Monarchy
By: Sanglune This is a large map with relatively safe and plentiful bases. The layout is balanced. Safe and plentiful early bases make it suitable for macro.
Golden Forge
By: Legan Big map with many bases close to each other with direct high ground attack path from natural to opponents vertical fourth and triangular third bases that separates the middle from sides and allows only moving between sides one three locations.
Hurricane
By: Superouman Large macro map shaped like a hurricane. The first three bases are very easy to take thanks to the large distance between the players. Two additional bases can be easily defended by keeping your army here.
Challenge #1
Both challenges, in this contest, are reruns of those we used for TLMC #12. While the maps submitted to the last contest were all great, we felt like not all options had been explored. In this challenge 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.
Avant Garde
By: RQM A macro-friendly map with safe pocket base. Geysers of the base are initially blocked with mineral nodes of 150. Also 2 rows of 5 minerals can be mined to open path from third to pocket base. Air blockers weaken strength of flanking between third and pocket base. High yield vespene bases close to middle are also handicapped with 150 mineral nodes. Mineral walls on middle allow slightly open fields.
Podcast
By: Timmay Enjoy a cup of coffee and listen you your favorite podcast as you destroy your opponents!
Mineral wall patches contain 5 minerals each, and the walls are positioned to keep tanks out of range of the 3rd/4th base. The other mineral wall is a base with rich geysers. This base is possible to take, but very exposed.
Golden Wall
By: Superouman This map’s structure is very unique. A wall divides the map in two very distinct halves. The bottom half of the is inaccessible at the beginning of the game. There are 3 ways to get to the bottom part: Mine the middle reduced minerals Mine the gold base Mine the main backdoor The players can choose to play the way they want. They can play the map in a vanilla style with five easy bases on the top part of the map. Or they can take advantage of the unique features of the map and outsmart the opponent by using the bottom part of the map.
Zen
By: Superouman This map has a very short rush path that goes through multiple rows of reduced mineral fields that are one tile wide. Early attacks through these tiny choke may be possible early but moving larger armies will take a very long time even if the distance is physically short. Players will need to mine these reduced mineral fields to move their armies more easily. Or they can ignore those fields and only use the sides of the map.
Challenge #2
The second return of a challenge. Here we challenged the community to create a map utilizing the structure “Inhibitor Zone Generator”, a neutral and invulnerable structure that slows in an AoE, in clever ways.
Polaris
By: KillerSmile Standard expansion pattern with Ihibitor Zone Generators placed on strategically important highground passages, but not touching a wall or cliff, so players can micro around it with smaller forces. A lighter touch on what to do with the IZG compared to Turbo Cruise 86.
Zeta Orion
By: Meavis A choked up center, partially by IZG's surrounded by an outer pathway. To give some extra incentive to control the center, a central high ground mineral only base exists a full base could simply not fit here without breaking the map.
Purity and Industry
By: Superouman Inhibitor Zone Generators (IZG) received a negative impression from players. This is mainly because getting slowed feels bad in all games. I thought about how IZGs could be used while reducing the frustrating sensation of players. This is why i choosed to use IZGs exclusively in areas where only air units can be affected. To fully use air only IZGs, i decided to use a map layout where both players start very close by air like back in the days on lost temple. I compensate the short air travel time by filling the air gap with IZG. I kept a small space that isn’t slowed on the edge of the map. This route allows for a safer attack and retreat path for air drop and harass. The power of air play toward the main base is reduced because the attacker’s units will get hit a few more times by the defender if they go straight through the IZG. The ground rush distance is quite long to bait players to still go for air units even if they are weaker in this map.
rip me but this is pretty solid amount of finalist, GJ to those who got in! Tho I'm questioning my design, as it was solid compared to many of the others...
Some very nice finalists this time. I'm of course an expert, having already played on 3 of these maps well before they were known finalists.
I think Cloud Monarchy is a bit too much visually. There's a lot going on there in terms of textures and I actually find it slightly hard to look at in this preview image (not sure about the in-game on that).
On July 02 2019 04:19 Pklixian wrote: rip me but this is pretty solid amount of finalist, GJ to those who got in! Tho I'm questioning my design, as it was solid compared to many of the others...
I thought most of them were solid, although a bit boring.
Congrats to all the finalists, but especially Superouman. Earthrise is the cleanest, and my favorite of the whole bunch. I have always been the most consistently impressed and inspired, in equal measure, by your maps, and was happy to see you return to the scene. And now I think you're the first mapper to get a full 6 maps in the finals, that's an astounding achievement. Congratulations, my friend.
Congrats to all finalists! Especially Superouman with his all six maps, this should have happened earlier. Also big congrats to newcomers too. Final congrats to my weakest entry. hehe
I've just played every map in the 'standard' category with a friend (unfortunately he had to go so I couldn't test the others) and 'Ever Dream' is my favorite for sure. It is very aesthetically pleasing which is always a nice bonus, but gameplay-wise it seems to flow nicely as well.
'Purity and Industry' caught my attention because of the color scheme so I loaded it up in a single player game and it looks really nice, I'll definitely get some games in on this map too.
Didn't watch all the games yesterday, but was purity and industry played? It seems very unique. It's like the oooooold scrap station map, but with inhibitor zones making air less brutally OP.
On July 03 2019 18:32 Acrofales wrote: Didn't watch all the games yesterday, but was purity and industry played? It seems very unique. It's like the oooooold scrap station map, but with inhibitor zones making air less brutally OP.
I believe it was played twice, once after the halfway point and then quite near the end iirc.
On July 03 2019 18:32 Acrofales wrote: Didn't watch all the games yesterday, but was purity and industry played? It seems very unique. It's like the oooooold scrap station map, but with inhibitor zones making air less brutally OP.
I believe it was played twice, once after the halfway point and then quite near the end iirc.
Saw Reynor vs Clem on it today. It is a beautiful map. Clem was gonna try some liberator shenanigans, but Reynor was doing a pretty standard nydus timing, overextended and died, so not a good show of whether it's actually very balanced or not. But it looks gorgeous.
So, another TLMC, another reason why I just don't really give a shit. TLMC is the only way to get your map onto ladder and once more, the finalists on TLMC either blow fucking ass, they are the "best" maps submitted out of ~150 maps, or the judges are biased and think they are the greatest maps ever. That's the biggest problem. TLMC is THE mapping tournament. It's THE tournament that you make your maps and submit them, you cross your fingers and you pray you get into the top 16. If you don't, fuuuuck, you lost... best of luck! Although... wait... Why did this piece of garbage map beat the others? Oh yeah, I have no clue!!
So, all of my maps didn't get into the finalists, that's fine...I get it... but the thing that really drives me crazy is when I look at how often my maps were "downloaded" by the judges (The platform I give my .sc2map files showcase me anytime the map gets downloaded) and 3 outta 6 of my maps didn't get downloaded (the overview got viewed by the looks of it from tl.net TLMC thread!) That's okay, all my overviews got viewed by AT LEAST ONE judge out of the... five? six? (according to the download site + TL.net) Then I hear balance complaint after balance complaint...
Yet when I look at those maps compared to some of these finalists... wait..., what???
One of my submitted maps (Dunes of Destiny) got top 7 in a different map contest, it was a Korean map making competition. At the end of the day, many people loved the layout and the overall strategy of the map..., especially since it was so different. That's great! Hopefully it does well in TLMC when I resubmit it!!! Hell, even the feedback from the past TLMC and the last Korean map tournament should only make it that much better, hence why I made the natural easier to defend, the third easier to defend and the rocks re-positioned..."""All of the judges were impressed with the design of this map.""" {pre-feedback) and I hope after all their feedback it only gets better!!!!1111
At that point,it didn't even get downloaded from the judges of TLMC #13 once and at the end of the day, the overview only got one download... ONE DOWNLOAD from a map that all judges were impressed with the previous TLMC... This map that won a Korean map tournament and I changed the layout according to feedback from all the judges and yet now... not a single TLMC #13 download?
Seriously... Like, seriously? Soooo... what's the difference? You say the 3rd choke is too open? You say the middle is boring? This map, before hand, was a top 7 outta hundreds of maps and after I change it according to the feedback to make it more balanced never got downloaded one time from TLMC #13???) You say the "paths" aren't good? Seriously? Nothing? No map download? One overview download? That's how you judge it??? How could a map that was top 7 outta what, 150 maps and then I edited it according to FEEDBACK from judges doesn't get a single download in TLMC #13???
---
Ughhh!!!
...Anyway, onto the "finalists..."
--- STANDARD ---
Simulacrum is...well as -0 said, a piece of garbage map that was created in about 5 hours. It's the Ascension to Aiur map. It's good enough...whatever, win it all. Hey -0, you did it again. The map you created in a few hours will now be the map of 2019 because Mizen saw a good SoO game on it.
Biosphere? Wow, you submit this map and I just thought you were fucking with everybody but guess what... it's negative zero soooo yeahh, give him at least a finalist or two. I'm glad for a "standard" map there is only 1 attack path for the first... 10? 15 minutes? of the game unless you take rocks down? But yeah, standard, force players to attack certain paths and force macro games... oh wait... should this be a macro map? Nahhh, it's "small enough!"
Ever Dream I actually think this is a little unique even though you HAVE to expand to the north (defensive or aggressive base) to take a 3rd because no way will you take the triangular third). You won't take the third base with a high yield gas and the triangluar base is so far from your nat and super open...
Earthrise, seriously? Just like the other fucking map which shares Cloud Kingdom's name... LOL. FFS, such a joke. I mean, truthfully it's not a bad map but at this point, why would you use this over Cloud Kingdom? Can we just take Cloud Kingdom and change the aesthetics to this style and congrats, not only is it a better map but the "style" has changed! The best part about it is tanks or libs by the forward third base which completely cuts off the choke/ramp/other 3rd base. There is also a shit ton of air space, but hey.... it looks cool. It's by Marras, let's give it a shot. What's the point of the rocks he added by the forward 3rd? Truth be told... they don't matter? But hey... it's purple, blue and dark sooo... fuck it, winner!
--- MACRO: ---
Eternal Empire - Didn't we already see this map in the other category? Oh yeah, Earthrise... wait... So it's the same exact damn map but like 30x30 bigger? PS. Don't believe me? Rotate it 90 degrees. It's basically what -0 did to get catalyst and blue shift back to back winners. Yeah, yaaaawn. Once more, judges are blinded by... uhh, you tell me?
Cloud Monarchy - This map is... well, different..., although look at all the shit load of main air space there is. It's funny because a map of mine... and another few other maps in this tournament got eliminated because there was "too much air space" but then I look at this and I'm like... wait a minute.... The other issue is that everything is choked off and there really isn't anything greater than 3x force field chokes. Which again is hilarious because one of my "macro" maps (this same category) got eliminated because there wasn't anything other than 3x wide choke points. Fun... Fun fun fun...
Golden Forge - Interesting enough, no issues with it, good enough map, different enough, can expand either way, can go aggro or defensive, props dude.
Hurricane - I don't even know... To choke the nat you have to go soooo far forward or else you have sooo much cliff/air space. The third is super open, the vertical 4th is very aggressive, the horizontal 4th is very awkward, it makes no sense how this map won the "macro" category. I mean... it looks good? Soooo..., sure? The middle is boring as shit? Hey, nazi symble but wide with a giant block in the center! Look at the middle 4 bases, guess what, you won't take those! Seriously? Ffs TL...
--- Challenge #1: ---
Avant Garde - inbase natural with a forward natural that takes 3x3 buildings to wall? How is this... ANY DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER INBASE NATURAL MAP??? Look at every other inbase natural map, they have the "free" base with the "3x3" 3rd base. This is the same exact shit. But guess what?!?!? There is a mineral wall in the middle!!! LOL!!!!! Like, seriously? This map doesn't do anything new with mineral walls and look, the inbase nat instead of rocks has "mineral walls!!!!" it's the same exact fucking thing!! But hey, sure, it's a "standard" map that has "mineral walls"... make it a winner!!!
Podcast - Waaait what? Timmay? With a map that actually uses the challenge and makes it somewhat interesting? The forward third is safe unless you attack from the long way. The "safe" third is somewhat safe unless you come up from a choke. There's even a forward mineral wall base with high yield gas which you may want to take to get the extra gas but it's super tough to defend. Once more, Timmay creates a great "challenge" map. Truthfully, will it do well with players/community/programers? Probably not, but within TLMC, a map like this is sooo much more superior than "standard map #288 with added mineral walls to create safe 3rd"
Golden Wall - Another great Challenge #1 map. Top half you fight unless you mine out the bottom half. That's great for the challenge map! Although, wait... why did Avant Garde do well because that's just a standard map with random minerals walls...? No clue... Either way, Avant Garde will probably be the "winner" of Challenge 1 because guess what? The challenge... the mineral walls don't watter because even without the mineral walls the map still isn't that damn terrible. So at this point, even though Golden Wall does "mineral walls" the best of them all, Avant Garde will probably win the vote because it's standard and the "gimmick" affects it the least!
Zen - Ya know, so many maps got instantly disqualified because the "high yield bases were OP" and then this map has a completely useless high yield gas bases but apparently that's okay? Same with random bases that are next to the main? (Truthfully, the horizontal bases to the main will NEVER be taken because the ground distance is waaaaaaay too long) but hey... it's choked off. It has some random "mineral walls" to extend the ground distance sooo.. it's good? It reminds me of Avant Garde a bit... Create a standard map, throw some random mineral walls in it and...CONGRATS! zzz, waste of a spot.
--- Challenge #2: ---
Zeta Orion - Two.... Two IZG that "COULD" affect the gameplay of the map and THIS is the winner of the CHALLENGE TWO category? Are you fucking serious? The middle IZG won't do shit. The corner IZG don't matter in 95% of the games. Like, seriously? This is one of the maps which has the "best use of IZG out of everything else?" I look at this and I can't help but laugh. The IZG don't do anything because the fastest scouting/attack path doesn't even go through them. It's just... I can't help but think this is a joke.
Polaris - Just read what I said with Zeta Orion about IZG although why would you ever take the lowground third? Maybe you like to get harassed and fucked over? Maybe you don't like choices? Maybe you like limited expansion paths? Do these IZG even do anything in this map? Is this map even any good as a "standard" map? Guess what? Nope! Even the mineral placement of the bases is trash. (forward 4th? triangular 3rd?) This honestly may be the worst map of the bunch, no offense Killersmile but... seriously? Give the random trophy to you just like we did with Arch of Janus!!!! Purity and Industry - It's macro enough. It's new enough. It spams IZG enough. It makes Air play a little less weak. Truthfully, the overall layout is kind of boring even though many of these diagnol maps you can't really do much different but it should be fun enough. The random high yield gas bases are too aggressive and not any good and same with the high yield mineral base. Remember scrap station, fast rush the corner gold and if you don't scout it you were behind? Guess whaaaaa???? There are issues with this map but at least the IZG usages is interesting enough for a challenge #2 map because it really forces you to either go ground or go "slow" air units.
---
Overall, I congratulation all the winners! I don't want to take any of the honors away from you because winning TLMC is a great honor but truthfully, as I look at the winning maps I'm a little disappointed with the results. Either way, I'm starting to get burnt out which is unfortunate as I feel I've created many amazing maps for the SC2 community...
Okay, give me a few minutes to respond to this bit by bit.
So, another TLMC, another reason why I just don't really give a shit. TLMC is the only way to get your map onto ladder and once more, the finalists on TLMC either blow fucking ass, they are the "best" maps submitted out of ~150 maps, or the judges are biased and think they are the greatest maps ever. That's the biggest problem. TLMC is THE mapping tournament. It's THE tournament that you make your maps and submit them, you cross your fingers and you pray you get into the top 16. If you don't, fuuuuck, you lost... best of luck! Although... wait... Why did this piece of garbage map beat the others? Oh yeah, I have no clue!!
Aside from just non-targeted rage, let's break down these parts:
the finalists on TLMC either blow fucking ass, they are the "best" maps submitted out of ~150 maps, or the judges are biased and think they are the greatest maps ever.
Is this not every option possible? They're awful maps, they're good for what was given, or we genuinely think they are S+ tier, what are the other choices we have?
If you don't, fuuuuck, you lost... best of luck! Although... wait... Why did this piece of garbage map beat the others? Oh yeah, I have no clue!... One of my submitted maps (Dunes of Destiny) got top 7 in a different map contest, it was a Korean map making competition. At the end of the day, many people loved the layout and the overall strategy of the map..., especially since it was so different. That's great! Hopefully it does well in TLMC when I resubmit it!!! Hell, even the feedback from the past TLMC and the last Korean map tournament should only make it that much better, hence why I made the natural easier to defend, the third easier to defend and the rocks re-positioned..."""All of the judges were impressed with the design of this map.""" {pre-feedback) and I hope after all their feedback it only gets better!!!!1111
There's a general point here, that there seems to be inconsistencies in what judges favor per TLMC, what they say and what they ask for, or what they look for. This is because the Judges are not often the same each time around, sometimes we are lacking in Terran judges, sometimes Protoss, sometimes entire players switch out (for example, Snute did not participate in TLMC13). Other times, real life issues get in the way, for this TLMC, I am dealing with a divorce, a death, moving houses, and an unstable job period, I did not have the time to invest into judging like I did in TLMC12. That's just my factor, and now imagine what or if Kantuva had factors that affected his ability to judge as well. TLMCs are not perfect and we never claim them to be, but we can try our hardest to make what we can out of what is given.
If you want my personal philosophy, I'm usually not going to change my mind on a map that's been resubmitted 4 times with minor or no changes. There were a few maps that were submitted this time around that did not make the Top 16, and some didn't even make the first pass that I thought were pretty decent. I would likely vote for them the same if they were just resubmitted to fill the 6/6 slots available for TLMC14.
So, all of my maps didn't get into the finalists, that's fine...I get it... but the thing that really drives me crazy is when I look at how often my maps were "downloaded" by the judges (The platform I give my .sc2map files showcase me anytime the map gets downloaded) and 3 outta 6 of my maps didn't get downloaded (the overview got viewed by the looks of it from tl.net TLMC thread!) That's okay, all my overviews got viewed by AT LEAST ONE judge out of the... five? six? (according to the download site + TL.net) Then I hear balance complaint after balance complaint...
...At that point,it didn't even get downloaded from the judges of TLMC #13 once and at the end of the day, the overview only got one download... ONE DOWNLOAD from a map that all judges were impressed with the previous TLMC... This map that won a Korean map tournament and I changed the layout according to feedback from all the judges and yet now... not a single TLMC #13 download?
I already addressed this part to you in Discord, but to post publically - it's extremely common for us to download one copy and then by the time the other judges come around, we have our own link (perhaps the link broke itself, or we needed to reupload, who knows what issue comes up) and we use that instead. Relying on DL numbers is not recommended here. Also, I know for a fact each map gets downloaded at least twice, so I wouldn't trust your websites anyway, no matter what they want to say to you.
Regarding some of your finalist criticisms now;
Just because they're top 16, as you said yourself.. doesn't meant they're always Top Tier maps. The top 16 is decided in a pretty specific way, and sometimes we just don't have the best pool ever possible, and this has always been the case. We also sometimes, due to criticisms you make even here, might not include a map that was rated equal to another, in order to create a much more varied pool that the playerbase, and you mapmakers, will enjoy.
Specific arguments made, such as Earthrise vs Eternal Empire seem pretty out there, and almost surface level criticisms that mapmakers often, privately, mock at players for doing themselves. They're both S shaped maps, sure, but it's pretty clear how different army movements will play out with multiple regions of the map, such as the triangle third (Earthrise has a path that arms out in a bend, Empire has a ramp directly infront of it), the middle of the map is completely different and serves a different purpose, the vertical fourths hold different risks and rewards, the corner bases as well. They are different takes on the same concept, sure, and also by the same author, whom also made Cloud Kingdom originally anyway, but these are the things that we look at. We look at execution, and when you have ideas that are refined, with new, even small spins, and if players like it? They're probably gunna pass highly. The mapmaker judges did something slightly different this time around when it comes to helping players have less work loaded onto them for their time constraints, and we would argue this Top 16 is pretty favorable for everyone, even if you as a mapmaker can nitpick the living fuck out of every single thing, for whatever reason you may choose.
Again, I will close - we are happy with the Top 16, but remember that these results do come from you mapmakers, I personally did not find the majority of maps in our low submission count to be that fantastic or interesting, many had some pretty open flaws that would've prompted comment threads like Sidians, and perhaps in even greater rage. Granted, this was a surprise TLMC with little time from the one before, so I can't say I expected *too* much, but, what can you do.
One question I have for the judges is: Is there any point in submitting non-standard maps to the 'standard' or 'macro' categories (in the absence of the 'new' category)?
I understand that theoretically a 'judge's pick' can be used on a non-standard map, but they haven't been in the past, and I'm unsure about how likely they are to be used in the future. Non-standard maps are almost by definition more controversial than standard maps, which seems to work against them in the TLMC. We've had a number of finalists (for instance Simulacrum) that do very little wrong by virtue of not doing anything non-standard (or interesting) whatsoever.
Do I think that a map like 'Cattail' is better than 'Simulacrum' or 'Golden Forge'? Probably not. But personally I'd still much rather see it in the top 16 in the interest of diversity than the seventh or eight best standard/macro map. I understand that the judges may disagree about this sentiment, so to circle back to my initial question: "Is it a waste of time/effort to submit non-standard maps in the non-challenge categories?"
Earthrise vs Eternal. Don't even deny it. (Shit I think the entire main layout is exactly the fucking same...) I BARELY did any edits besides rotating the map 90 degrees and it's the SAME MAP!
If you want me to go into more details on the other maps I can... But to sit here and say every map is unique and different and that's why they won is complete and utter bullshit. I get it. TLMC is hard to judge and looking at new maps and picking winners and losers is really tough. But when I, someone who only saw the maps less than 1 day looks at these maps and goes... wow, these are the same god damn maps when you judges had... weeks(?) to narrow it down? Honestly... it's pretty damn pathetic.
Seriously...? Go ahead? Tell me these maps are not similar or will play out the completely different? The dude who spent 15 minutes looking at the finalists compared to the judges who apparently spent over a week...
soO vs Patience game 1 on Purity vs Industry was very interesting. Game 2 illustrated what happens if you don't know the map well when Patience wanted to mine vespene from blocked geysers... and then died.
On July 05 2019 14:22 SidianTheBard wrote: Earthrise vs Eternal. Don't even deny it. (Shit I think the entire main layout is exactly the fucking same...) I BARELY did any edits besides rotating the map 90 degrees and it's the SAME MAP!
If you want me to go into more details on the other maps I can... But to sit here and say every map is unique and different and that's why they won is complete and utter bullshit. I get it. TLMC is hard to judge and looking at new maps and picking winners and losers is really tough. But when I, someone who only saw the maps less than 1 day looks at these maps and goes... wow, these are the same god damn maps when you judges had... weeks(?) to narrow it down? Honestly... it's pretty damn pathetic.
Seriously...? Go ahead? Tell me these maps are not similar or will play out the completely different? The dude who spent 15 minutes looking at the finalists compared to the judges who apparently spent over a week...
As much as I dislike asinine rage/sore losers/general whining/etc., I mean... he's not wrong here, lol.
^ No! Guys seriously pay attention to the details, PLZ. The horizontal 4th is on even ground on the sand map and low ground on the grey, grey has tons of smokescreens while sand map doesn't, the corner bases are on even ground on sand and high ground ramp-isolated corner base on the other.. one map has rich geysers and the other doesn't... this can't be serious. Take some time to go over each base one by one, just because something can seem familiar it's far from identical or playing out in an identical manner.
As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
I think honestly that's a stupid criticism. We've reached the year 2019, where, for better or worse, the standard for maps has reached a pretty fine point. The two maps look similar, except for nearly every single detail which is different. This criticism also stems from the premise that every single map we ever make needs to have a completely distinct concept. While that was usually how I liked to roll, that is by no means true. You can release a set of different maps that are all plays on the same concept, or that use a similar set of features, and let people vet out which one they like the best, since only a select few see the ladder anyway. And that's exactly what I see when they choose any 2 similar looking maps to be in the finals.
My biggest problem is that the main, natural and third are completely the same. At that point, why don't we just take this same exact main>nat>third layout, copy/paste it over and over again and just create different 4ths, 5ths, 6ths, etc etc? I mean, hell, even all the little gaps and edges of the bases are exactly the same. You can tell, you can completely tell he used the same exact main/nat/third layout style between those bases. You can see the same gaps. You can see the same "overlord" pods. You can see the same ground decal doodads. Then you look at base location layout and see that... man, pretty much every single base is in the same exact location. It's almost like not only did he copy/paste the main/nat/third, he copy/pasted every single base and then changed the orientation of the 4th/5th/6th and rotated the map 90 degrees.
It's the same thing that I bitched about with Blue Shift & Catalyst. I do this every TLMC and truthfully it's pretty irritating that people think I'm complaining because I didn't win. Look at every TLMC finalist post and you'll see that I do this all the time. I share my thoughts on the maps. Love it or hate it, I've been mapping on this video game for over a decade now and I like to believe that even though I may not be some Grand Master player that I still can look at a layout and read how a map would play out.
I've said it before, I'm all for having a sc2 map pool which has nothing but completely standard maps. Hell, I think these challenge categories are a waste of time and I wish TLMC was just 16 Standard/Macro maps because those are the real gems.
But when you can clearly see the first three bases (truthfully... most games never go beyond the first 3 base) it really makes me a little irritated. I mean, shit, it's basically the same thing I did with King's Cove. I used generally the same main>nat>third layout, yet rotated it and all of a sudden it's such a great map. Although at least the difference between Abyssal and King's Cove is all the other bases I tried to change it up. I moved around the corner bases, the pathing, the middle. Yet when the "biggest" change between these two maps is one has LOSB in the middle while the other has ramps (honestly, both mainly accomplish the same exact thing) it's pretty annoying.
---
Look... The main is EXACTLY the same, even down to every little nook and cranny... Shit, even the nat and third are barely changed one bit. But hey, rotate the map 90 degrees and nobody (most people?) won't be able to tell anyway!
PS, don't complain about TLMC maps because you'll get banned from the mapping channel even though you share your thoughts, share your feedback and try your best. But hey, you disagree with the master of all and good luck, game over. zzzzz.
This may be my end because too many mappers cry and complain and yet when you retaliate and give your input on why these maps aren't any good, instead of telling you the reason, they QQ, they abuse their status and they kick you. Congrats Avex, pull your head out of your ass dude, everything doesn't revolve around you.
For clarity, Sidian got the kick for constantly asking the same question which had been answered multiple times at that point, and remaining hostile towards people who disagreed with him.
On July 06 2019 10:16 SidianTheBard wrote: My biggest problem is that the main, natural and third are completely the same.
You missed a big difference in the third base. On Eternal Empire, there are two entrances and the shortest is up a ramp and the second entrance that requires a big detour is flat, which is the whole theme of the map. you know, the basic idea of "the longer path gives a better attack angle" which i push further here. + Show Spoiler +
On Earthrise, there is only one entrance which is already flat.
And on top of that, Earthrise is physically slightly bigger than Eternal Empire but has shorter distances between both players because the middle is very different. Earthrise (Standard): 144x140: 20160 area, Natural to Natural travel time: 29s Eternal Empire (Macro): 140x140: 19600 area, Natural to Natural travel time: 35s
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
Err, they're called "standard" maps for a reason. The point is clearly that they are meant to encourage standard play, where the timing attacks are normal, and if you know how to defend a proxy 3-rax on king's cove you kinda also know how to do that on Golden Forge. The time it can hit may be 1 or 2 seconds shorter or longer, but you know it approximately. Meanwhile there are plenty of funky maps in the other categories. There have been some interesting games on Purity and Industry, and also on Golden Wall has stood out as having some weird quirks to it. I'm sure you could create unique maps without using these particular challenges, but the challenges have definitely worked to create quirky maps this time around. Games on Podcast have also been fun...and Avant Garde has been a clown fiesta.
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
Err, they're called "standard" maps for a reason. The point is clearly that they are meant to encourage standard play, where the timing attacks are normal, and if you know how to defend a proxy 3-rax on king's cove you kinda also know how to do that on Golden Forge. The time it can hit may be 1 or 2 seconds shorter or longer, but you know it approximately. Meanwhile there are plenty of funky maps in the other categories. There have been some interesting games on Purity and Industry, and also on Golden Wall has stood out as having some weird quirks to it. I'm sure you could create unique maps without using these particular challenges, but the challenges have definitely worked to create quirky maps this time around. Games on Podcast have also been fun...and Avant Garde has been a clown fiesta.
Agreed that is what the "challenge" maps are theoretically meant for, but anybody who watches/plays/makes maps in SC2 knows those aren't the maps we see in tournaments or ladder. The only exception I can think of is Thunderbird, which utiilizes a standard map concept with added mineral blocks that are a fun variation on the norm, but do not dramatically shift gameplay outcomes. I'd be overjoyed to see a map like Golden Wall make it to the ladder (I don't like Purity and Industry), that will genuinely facilitate some alternative syles of gameplay. But I'd make a large bet that it won't make it past top 16 because it ventures too far from the standard map requirements.
EDIT: Cliffhanger by ATTx was my favorite submission to this TLMC, but it doesn't take more than a glance to realize that a majority of judges most likely ruled it out immediately because it is so far from what is considered appropriate in a map. It is a pipedream that maps that are as creative and unique as Cliffhanger would ever be allowed into SC2.
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
Err, they're called "standard" maps for a reason. The point is clearly that they are meant to encourage standard play, where the timing attacks are normal, and if you know how to defend a proxy 3-rax on king's cove you kinda also know how to do that on Golden Forge. The time it can hit may be 1 or 2 seconds shorter or longer, but you know it approximately. Meanwhile there are plenty of funky maps in the other categories. There have been some interesting games on Purity and Industry, and also on Golden Wall has stood out as having some weird quirks to it. I'm sure you could create unique maps without using these particular challenges, but the challenges have definitely worked to create quirky maps this time around. Games on Podcast have also been fun...and Avant Garde has been a clown fiesta.
Agreed that is what the "challenge" maps are theoretically meant for, but anybody who watches/plays/makes maps in SC2 knows those aren't the maps we see in tournaments or ladder. The only exception I can think of is Thunderbird, which utiilizes a standard map concept with added mineral blocks that are a fun variation on the norm, but do not dramatically shift gameplay outcomes. I'd be overjoyed to see a map like Golden Wall make it to the ladder (I don't like Purity and Industry), that will genuinely facilitate some alternative syles of gameplay. But I'd make a large bet that it won't make it past top 16 because it ventures too far from the standard map requirements.
EDIT: Cliffhanger by ATTx was my favorite submission to this TLMC, but it doesn't take more than a glance to realize that a majority of judges most likely ruled it out immediately because it is so far from what is considered appropriate in a map. It is a pipedream that maps that are as creative and unique as Cliffhanger would ever be allowed into SC2.
Cliffhanger's use of slow zones is nothing interesting. All those slow zones on a tiny elongated choke surrounded by cliffs just mean that no one is ever going to go through it after the early game (and in fact no one would do that even if the slow zones didn't exist).
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
Err, they're called "standard" maps for a reason. The point is clearly that they are meant to encourage standard play, where the timing attacks are normal, and if you know how to defend a proxy 3-rax on king's cove you kinda also know how to do that on Golden Forge. The time it can hit may be 1 or 2 seconds shorter or longer, but you know it approximately. Meanwhile there are plenty of funky maps in the other categories. There have been some interesting games on Purity and Industry, and also on Golden Wall has stood out as having some weird quirks to it. I'm sure you could create unique maps without using these particular challenges, but the challenges have definitely worked to create quirky maps this time around. Games on Podcast have also been fun...and Avant Garde has been a clown fiesta.
Agreed that is what the "challenge" maps are theoretically meant for, but anybody who watches/plays/makes maps in SC2 knows those aren't the maps we see in tournaments or ladder. The only exception I can think of is Thunderbird, which utiilizes a standard map concept with added mineral blocks that are a fun variation on the norm, but do not dramatically shift gameplay outcomes. I'd be overjoyed to see a map like Golden Wall make it to the ladder (I don't like Purity and Industry), that will genuinely facilitate some alternative syles of gameplay. But I'd make a large bet that it won't make it past top 16 because it ventures too far from the standard map requirements.
EDIT: Cliffhanger by ATTx was my favorite submission to this TLMC, but it doesn't take more than a glance to realize that a majority of judges most likely ruled it out immediately because it is so far from what is considered appropriate in a map. It is a pipedream that maps that are as creative and unique as Cliffhanger would ever be allowed into SC2.
Cliffhanger's use of slow zones is nothing interesting. All those slow zones on a tiny elongated choke surrounded by cliffs just mean that no one is ever going to go through it after the early game (and in fact no one would do that even if the slow zones didn't exist).
Oh yeah I should have clarified, the slowing zones aren't what I think is the interesting part about the map. Just allowed it to be in the category. It's essentially a Hitchhiker remake from BW.
Superouman's maps jump out at me both aesthetically and creatively. Most of the others, while well made, seem like stuff we've seen before. Unless I glossed over something.
On July 06 2019 08:33 Liquid`Snute wrote: As maps develop towards better standards they're going to become increasingly similar, it's just part of it. But don't spread misconceptions about maps being identical when they clearly are not >.<
Meanwhile, ASL has weird and unique maps every season. Which I enjoy a lot as a viewer, as it creates unique games. So I don't think it's at all neccessary or inevitable that maps become increasingly similar. They only become that way when new maps have to fit in an increasingly more defined mold. At which point you might as well stop making new maps.
Err, they're called "standard" maps for a reason. The point is clearly that they are meant to encourage standard play, where the timing attacks are normal, and if you know how to defend a proxy 3-rax on king's cove you kinda also know how to do that on Golden Forge. The time it can hit may be 1 or 2 seconds shorter or longer, but you know it approximately. Meanwhile there are plenty of funky maps in the other categories. There have been some interesting games on Purity and Industry, and also on Golden Wall has stood out as having some weird quirks to it. I'm sure you could create unique maps without using these particular challenges, but the challenges have definitely worked to create quirky maps this time around. Games on Podcast have also been fun...and Avant Garde has been a clown fiesta.
Agreed that is what the "challenge" maps are theoretically meant for, but anybody who watches/plays/makes maps in SC2 knows those aren't the maps we see in tournaments or ladder. The only exception I can think of is Thunderbird, which utiilizes a standard map concept with added mineral blocks that are a fun variation on the norm, but do not dramatically shift gameplay outcomes. I'd be overjoyed to see a map like Golden Wall make it to the ladder (I don't like Purity and Industry), that will genuinely facilitate some alternative syles of gameplay. But I'd make a large bet that it won't make it past top 16 because it ventures too far from the standard map requirements.
EDIT: Cliffhanger by ATTx was my favorite submission to this TLMC, but it doesn't take more than a glance to realize that a majority of judges most likely ruled it out immediately because it is so far from what is considered appropriate in a map. It is a pipedream that maps that are as creative and unique as Cliffhanger would ever be allowed into SC2.
Cliffhanger's use of slow zones is nothing interesting. All those slow zones on a tiny elongated choke surrounded by cliffs just mean that no one is ever going to go through it after the early game (and in fact no one would do that even if the slow zones didn't exist).
Oh yeah I should have clarified, the slowing zones aren't what I think is the interesting part about the map. Just allowed it to be in the category. It's essentially a Hitchhiker remake from BW.
With how strong air play is in SCII I'm not convinced that a map like Cliffhanger would be fun given that by ground you just have two small chokes to split the map. Though generally speaking I do agree that it would be nice if the TLMC and SCII tournaments in general were friendlier to non-standard maps.
Simulacrum Nice dynamic pathing, good balance of high/lowground, distinct-feeling expansion path choices
Biosphere Messy but intriguing; probably one too many expansions though; maybe remove one each of the rocks at 3/9
Hurricane I like the heavy focus on highground control
Avant Garde Blocking geysers with minerals is not fun; rest of the map seems neat, although I'm not a fan of backdoor expansions at all, but I like the central valley and the flanking opportunities it creates
Zen Mineral blocks might be excessive, but I like the central valley vs side expansion dynamic
Polaris The lowground 3rd is a mistake and should be removed from the map; the highground 3rd and lowground 4th are very nice; the pathing is a little annoying-- the way that it's so difficult for bottom left to get to top left for example, but I suspect this leads to interesting gameplay if it's not too constricted
Zeta Orion I like the map a lot, but no one in the history of sc2 will take a min-only expansion-- you don't need an incentive to control the highground, it's the highground
Purity and Industry Neat concept, but way too many expansions and the land-based layout is very messy-- needs a lot of work still
Ever Dream Too many expansions frustrate an otherwise neatly simple layout; also while it's beautiful from a full-map-view it seems too plain at in-game depth
Earthrise The lowground expansion due north/south of the natural expansion should be removed, and the walls that split the very center should probably be moved slightly away from the center (towards the expansion I want removed) to promote the southwest vs northeast dynamic; even with this it might have too many expansions
Golden Forge I want to like it, but the cool ramp and valley pathing is no where near any expansion so the whole dynamic gets muddled up-- I think this needs remade from scratch with a more clear design that associates the pathing and expansions better
Podcast Unbelievable mess-- too many expansions and incredibly annoying pathing; and do you really expect anyone to ever in the history of sc2 take the expansions facing the center? That concept is playable as seen in older maps, but not when it's that deep in the middle and so high up on the list of expansions to take (6th base?)
Golden Wall Actually a really neat idea that was poorly executed-- the way to make this work is remake it from scratch with many fewer expansions so the players' choices are more important (and with bigger mains); also you probably want to make it a little easier to defend the main-backdoor-mineral path-- it's kind of a long ramp to wall off given that you still have to wall off the "front" ramp too; and while I like the top vs bottom dynamic, I wonder if the wall idea works better in a diagonally reverse symmetry, e.g. wall going from southwest to northeast
On July 10 2019 05:50 Nightmarjoo wrote: Simulacrum Nice dynamic pathing, good balance of high/lowground, distinct-feeling expansion path choices
Biosphere Messy but intriguing; probably one too many expansions though; maybe remove one each of the rocks at 3/9
Hurricane I like the heavy focus on highground control
Avant Garde Blocking geysers with minerals is not fun; rest of the map seems neat, although I'm not a fan of backdoor expansions at all, but I like the central valley and the flanking opportunities it creates
Zen Mineral blocks might be excessive, but I like the central valley vs side expansion dynamic
Polaris The lowground 3rd is a mistake and should be removed from the map; the highground 3rd and lowground 4th are very nice; the pathing is a little annoying-- the way that it's so difficult for bottom left to get to top left for example, but I suspect this leads to interesting gameplay if it's not too constricted
Zeta Orion I like the map a lot, but no one in the history of sc2 will take a min-only expansion-- you don't need an incentive to control the highground, it's the highground
Purity and Industry Neat concept, but way too many expansions and the land-based layout is very messy-- needs a lot of work still
Ever Dream Too many expansions frustrate an otherwise neatly simple layout; also while it's beautiful from a full-map-view it seems too plain at in-game depth
Earthrise The lowground expansion due north/south of the natural expansion should be removed, and the walls that split the very center should probably be moved slightly away from the center (towards the expansion I want removed) to promote the southwest vs northeast dynamic; even with this it might have too many expansions
Golden Forge I want to like it, but the cool ramp and valley pathing is no where near any expansion so the whole dynamic gets muddled up-- I think this needs remade from scratch with a more clear design that associates the pathing and expansions better
Podcast Unbelievable mess-- too many expansions and incredibly annoying pathing; and do you really expect anyone to ever in the history of sc2 take the expansions facing the center? That concept is playable as seen in older maps, but not when it's that deep in the middle and so high up on the list of expansions to take (6th base?)
Golden Wall Actually a really neat idea that was poorly executed-- the way to make this work is remake it from scratch with many fewer expansions so the players' choices are more important (and with bigger mains); also you probably want to make it a little easier to defend the main-backdoor-mineral path-- it's kind of a long ramp to wall off given that you still have to wall off the "front" ramp too; and while I like the top vs bottom dynamic, I wonder if the wall idea works better in a diagonally reverse symmetry, e.g. wall going from southwest to northeast
Heyyy Nightmare Joel! :D
I see that in most of your feedback you mention the high number of expansions. Currently, the "meta" of map-making is to give multiple expansion patterns that let players take at least 5 bases which is why there are so many bases. Also, the lower number of resources per base that lotv bringed reinforces that aspect.
This has the effect to make the mined out map scenarios basically non-existent. I realized that recently and i'll see if i can figure out a way to make a macro focused map that has only 12 bases to make hectic and scrappy low eco/high tech scenarios more common.
I can't distinguish between anything (especially my own units) on the golden maps, even though this test gave me a perfect score. Anyone with the same issue?
I don't know much, but I really miss the really small maps and hate the large maps. My banning patter in ladder is also always to just count the bases in the maps (since there are no 4 player maps anymore). Also think Sidian is right to dislike Maps being so similar.
On July 11 2019 03:31 the p00n wrote: I can't distinguish between anything (especially my own units) on the golden maps, even though this test gave me a perfect score. Anyone with the same issue?
I don't understand what you mean here.
On July 11 2019 03:51 DSh1 wrote: I don't know much, but I really miss the really small maps and hate the large maps. My banning patter in ladder is also always to just count the bases in the maps (since there are no 4 player maps anymore). Also think Sidian is right to dislike Maps being so similar.
This is an asymmetrically balanced game that has various playstyles. LotV is designed to rush to the endgame, and punishes players for not expanding - thus maps become larger with higher base counts. Maps like Fracture did not perform well despite being exactly what you ask for.
On July 11 2019 03:51 DSh1 wrote: I don't know much, but I really miss the really small maps and hate the large maps. My banning patter in ladder is also always to just count the bases in the maps (since there are no 4 player maps anymore). Also think Sidian is right to dislike Maps being so similar.
This is an asymmetrically balanced game that has various playstyles. LotV is designed to rush to the endgame, and punishes players for not expanding - thus maps become larger with higher base counts. Maps like Fracture did not perform well despite being exactly what you ask for.
I agree that "small" maps are terrible and have bad gameplay. I think, overall, it is mostly because of the pathing changes between BW and SC2, as well as the shorter, more explosive army engagements. Other aspects of the race designs and gameplay designs in SC2, as you mentioned, also make short distances and forward expansions unappealing.
I would like to add an in-between option, not simply the small vs. large map dichotomy, where we got to see a larger map (not massive like Cloud Monarchy) that only has 12 or mayyyybe 14 expansions with half expos that are well placed. Many of the reasons behind maps having multiple expansion directions could actually be flipped into being captivating features of a map that had slightly fewer options.
EPT
This standard map provides the usual complement of chokes, open areas, and choices of expansion. Defend the central bridges, or control the forward high ground bases as a late game focal point.
Though the initial 3 base setup is very standard, Biosphere's layout encourages more of a top vs bottom split than the diagonal situation common in other maps. The direct scouting/attack path passes through 3 LoS blocked chokes, allowing for ambushes and encouraging players to explore the various other, more open, paths. Pairs of destructible rocks along the map edges force attention towards the central low ground earlier in the game, while making the outlying bases slightly safer to take.
The map has 16 blue bases, two of which have a single rich gas geyser. The average rush distance is 37s. There are rocks in the middle path and on the ramp leading into the lowground third. Line of sight blockers are situated in the 11 & 5 o’clock positions on the outer path of the map an in the highround near them in addition to the direct middle. Main bases not directly in the corner.
Average sized map with a simple expansion layout. Rocks can be taken down to reduce the distance between the players.
The map has 14 blue bases and an average rush distance of 36s. There are rocks at both thirds and on one of the ramps leading through the middle highground areas. Two sets of line of sight blockers are located the 1 & 7 o’clock positions.
A modern interpretation of Cloud Kingdom. Even though the map isn’t as huge as other macro maps, most of the expansions are easy to secure. The first three bases have small chokes which helps surviving early attacks. The xel naga tower near the middle helps the players to cover more paths and expansions.
This is a large map with relatively safe and plentiful bases. The layout is balanced. Safe and plentiful early bases make it suitable for macro.
Big map with many bases close to each other with direct high ground attack path from natural to opponents vertical fourth and triangular third bases that separates the middle from sides and allows only moving between sides one three locations.
Large macro map shaped like a hurricane. The first three bases are very easy to take thanks to the large distance between the players. Two additional bases can be easily defended by keeping your army here.
A macro-friendly map with safe pocket base. Geysers of the base are initially blocked with mineral nodes of 150. Also 2 rows of 5 minerals can be mined to open path from third to pocket base. Air blockers weaken strength of flanking between third and pocket base. High yield vespene bases close to middle are also handicapped with 150 mineral nodes. Mineral walls on middle allow slightly open fields.
Enjoy a cup of coffee and listen you your favorite podcast as you destroy your opponents!
This map’s structure is very unique. A wall divides the map in two very distinct halves. The bottom half of the is inaccessible at the beginning of the game. There are 3 ways to get to the bottom part:
This map has a very short rush path that goes through multiple rows of reduced mineral fields that are one tile wide. Early attacks through these tiny choke may be possible early but moving larger armies will take a very long time even if the distance is physically short. Players will need to mine these reduced mineral fields to move their armies more easily. Or they can ignore those fields and only use the sides of the map.
Standard expansion pattern with Ihibitor Zone Generators placed on strategically important highground passages, but not touching a wall or cliff, so players can micro around it with smaller forces. A lighter touch on what to do with the IZG compared to Turbo Cruise 86.
A choked up center, partially by IZG's surrounded by an outer pathway. To give some extra incentive to control the center, a central high ground mineral only base exists a full base could simply not fit here without breaking the map.
Inhibitor Zone Generators (IZG) received a negative impression from players. This is mainly because getting slowed feels bad in all games. I thought about how IZGs could be used while reducing the frustrating sensation of players. This is why i choosed to use IZGs exclusively in areas where only air units can be affected. To fully use air only IZGs, i decided to use a map layout where both players start very close by air like back in the days on lost temple. I compensate the short air travel time by filling the air gap with IZG. I kept a small space that isn’t slowed on the edge of the map. This route allows for a safer attack and retreat path for air drop and harass. The power of air play toward the main base is reduced because the attacker’s units will get hit a few more times by the defender if they go straight through the IZG. The ground rush distance is quite long to bait players to still go for air units even if they are weaker in this map.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/iy25ODa.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://im5.ezgif.com/tmp/ezgif-5-1567a4221a7b.gif)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/bch9bGW.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/uAldzhn.jpg)
