After much deliberation, we have decided on the sixteen finalists for the 15th edition of the TL.net Map Contest. Judging was especially difficult this time around, with 176(!) individual maps submitted in one of the highest turnouts in contest history. Each iteration of TLMC has seen the average quality of maps increase, and this was most certainly one of the strongest TLMC fields ever.
Now that the Judging Phase comes to an end, the Tournament and Public Voting Phase is set to begin. We've decided to adjust the period of public voting by a few days from the initial schedule, and will now run from July 3rd to July 12th (ends on July 12th 23:59 PDT). As in previous tournaments, fan voting decides the winners of the TLMC and the payouts, but the actual maps selected for the competitive ladder may differ.
The TL.net Map Contest Tournament itself will be hosted thanks to the ever-loving grace of WardiTV, and will run from July 6th-12th. While voting will open before the tournament concludes, we recommend that you watch the maps in action before voting, if you have the time.
Some notes before we unveil the maps:
All maps are accompanied by comments from the map-maker.
The maps are listed in random order, and do not reflect their score in judge voting.
TLMC #15 sought to reintroduce maps with 3 or more starting positions, reserving four finalist spots for such maps. Maps in this sub-category have been noted.
Voting is open until Tuesday, Jul 13 6:59am GMT (GMT+00:00)
Alright, enough preamble! Let's get on to our sixteen finalists!
Standard
The standard category is a staple of the TLMC, and is the most popular category by far. A standard map challenges a mapmaker to stand out without using any gimmicks or tricks. This is StarCraft at its most fundamental level, ensuring strong competition for both players and the mapmakers themselves.
The Scavenger
By: voluminA standard map with 7 bases per player. The 4 closest expansions are relatively easy to hold. The other 2 expansions are further away, with one of which has double rich gas.
The choke in the middle is a little twisted to elongate the rush distance, but it's 2 tiles wide allowing larger units to pass. Destroying 4x4 rocks shortens the middle path, but still leaves a relatively small choke.
Highground paths between the linear and triangular 3rd bases are blocked by huge rocks to limit early game aggression.
There is a secondary Reaper path to the main that can be blocked by 1 Pylon/Supply Depot.
There is a potential 3 Pylon-Cannon spot in the natural between minerals and mains cliff.
Map Features
Click to expand
Oblivion
By: themusic246A winding low-ground path through the middle holds an aggressive attack route and vulnerable expansion. Hold either stretch of high ground for positional advantage and use the winding low-ground paths along the side to flank. Rocks divide up attack lanes.
Map Features
Click to expand
Aqueducts
By: SuperoumanA standard map that features thousand years old Protoss aqueducts. The first few bases are easy to take but taking additional bases during the late game will require good army presence in the middle.
Map Features
Click to expand
Judges' picks/Designated 3+ starting position maps
Jacaranda
By: Agaton4 starting positions, 16 bases, and no starting position restrictions. Destructible rocks play an important role as they even out the rush distances between starting positions while also giving the low ground 3rd base a layer of early protection. Depending on the starting location, one might want to take a 3rd base in the other direction, which is a bit more exposed, but doesn't suffer from being low ground. Breaking the rocks near the center allows one to move more freely and opens up for faster rotations between expansions as well as flanking. Besides the fact that it has 4 spawns, it's a fairly standard map
Destructible rocks lengthens the distance between players as well as rotations in the early game. They also help balance out close-spawn positions.
Line of Sight blockers provide some flanking opportunities in the center.
Map Features
Click to expand
Undercity
By: RQMA 4 player map with a rotational layout. All spawns are enabled. Initial rush paths on vertical/horizontal-start games involve high ground paths that are narrowed by rocks. Destroying the rocks opens up those paths, and also grants additional access to the center.
Shortest rush paths on diagonal-start games involve a small 4x4 rock with Line of Sight blockers (2x2). The rocks help defense or ranged units in the early game. Thirds can be taken both clockwise & counterclockwise depending on the opponent's position. Players can mine mineral walls to open paths between the third and the fourth. Each chunk costs 10. Siege tanks cannot strike resources over mineral walls.
Map Features
Click to expand
Rush
These maps with short rush distances and smaller overall area favor aggressive and cutthroat gameplay. Frantic early and mid-game activity is a hallmark of these maps.
Curious Minds
By: MiloOnFireA smaller map with major tension around 2 low ground expansions. Curious minds will try to control both Xel'Naga towers to prepare for incoming pressure. This small map has 3 linear expansions that have ramps and chokepoints to defend early on. There is an open low ground 4th that is closer to the enemy, focusing much of the action to that area.. With many different attacking paths and flanking angles, vision is the most important resource. Xel Naga towers are far away from expansions and aren't easy to secure.
Map Features
Click to expand
Iliad
By: MarrasIliad is a small rush map with 12 bases. There are 2 options for taking 3rd bases. The natural choke is slightly smaller than normal. The main base is not directly in the corner which also means there’s quite a bit of airspace between the main and the natural.
Map Features
Click to expand
Berlingrad
By: Skypirinha1The slightly below average size and distance to the enemy in combination with lowground 3rd base options favors aggressive play. Taking down the debris or mineral wall in front of the natural shortens the direct path to the enemy and weakens the defensive position in front of the natural. A debris-mineral wall combination in the front of the natural closes off a direct path towards the middle—when opened the rush distance is reduced.
There is a small Reaper ledge towards the main.
The Overlord pillar a small distance away from the natural entrance.
Air units are safe in the main base corner.
Map Features
Click to expand
Macro
While 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. This allows for a longer 'wind up time,' leading to more explosive late-games!
Enchanted Isle
By: CharactRThe shortest distance across runs through a low ground area with high ground paths on both sides. Either 3rd base has only 1 frontal entrance. Line of sight blockers are located down the center of each respective lane with blockades between them. Crush your opponents and then relax and enjoy the view.
Map Features
Click to expand
Fountainhead
By: KillerSmileThe high ground paths in the middle have long rocks placed on them, so there are divergent attack paths to the enemy third base. You can take the rocks down and let the strong highground act as a hub for launching attacks into the enemy bases, of which there are plenty on this large macro map. Despite its size the rush distance is surprisingly short. This offers a variety of options even in the early game, but you will have to deal with a lot of sight blockers in the middle crossing the map.
Map Features
Click to expand
Sanguinite
By: voluminA macro map where players expand diagonally. All bases are close to each other, strengthening defensive play in the early game, but destroying the rocks makes the map quite open.
Rocks on the natural ramp offer different wall-off possibilities.
Destroying the rocks on the natural ramp allows easy access to linear 3rd.
There is a very close triangular 3rd, but with two entry ramps.
Map Features
Click to expand
Judges' pick/Designated 3+ player map
Bulwark
By: IeZaeLA slightly experimental 4 player map. The natural is non-standard, allowing a somewhat comparable but different third expansion in every spawn position. The typical 3rd -> 4th - > 5th awkward expansion transition is eased by adding a possible 4th highground base, closer than usual. The middle of the map is raised and can be partially closed off. The natural wall-off is not standard, similar to Abyssal Reef. A full wall-off is possible with only 3 3x3 buildings + zealots, like this. Siege tanks can’t reach high ground 3rd base resources from the adjacent base.
Map Features
Click to expand
Freestyle
A new category to make use of the new Terrain Height features, alongside other new ideas for how StarCraft II can be played. This is a category which seeks unorthodox, outside-the-box maps!
Treadmill
By: ZweckFinally, a map with speed zones that actually DO something. In the past the speed zones did not really have a strategic impact on gameplay and kind of were just decoration. The concept here is to address a symptom of this kind of rectangular symmetry: With symmetry like this you will always have a short and straight attack path between mains and a very long and distant path on the other side of the map. The use of acceleration zones and inhibitor zones counter this characteristic. They shorten the distant path on the upper side and extend the straight path through the bottom so the map gets a twist towards a rotational symmetry map. Only with still being a rectangular symmetry map!
Map Features
Click to expand
Pride of Altaris
By: 4096SPThis is a large sized map which is set to be part of one of the three ancient arkships: the Pride of Altaris. Its beautiful landscape restores the ship’s relaxing garden which consists of gold mines, plants and mild creatures. Through the glass floor in the middle of the map, it can be seen that the Spear of Adun cruises beside. This map utilizes up to four terrain height levels. The six expansion mines spot on the lower ground can be easily assaulted, especially the gold mines. However, it also possesses eight pieces of gold mineral patches that could be worth the risk. The gold mines consist of 8 mineral patches instead of six. The locations of gold mines are at the lowest level of terrain height, each location has a higher ground area at the back which can be easily attacked from. And because of the high risk of taking these mines, I hope that by increasing the amount of gold mineral, the high risk of mining these gold can be worthwhile.
Map Features
Click to expand
Yamatai
By: qtsha1This map is an ancient Japanese kingdom theme, inspired by the Tomb Raider games. This map has a very unique layout even though it's freestyle, it possesses a lot of ramps and the cliff levels are switching all the way around. The map features a much more macro and defensive approach due to how many ramps this map has so positioning is of far bigger value than usual. These ramps can easily be turned against you should an enemy drop happen on the other side of the map or even if they are used as choke points with zoning units like Mines/Tanks/Liberators/Lurkers etc. The map promotes narrower paths because of its heavier reliance on ramps. Xel'Naga towers may not provide vision of the center path, but their role grows exponentially as the game goes on because the sides of the map will become far more important. Sorry for somewhat chaotic aesthetics, but at least they look awesome.
Map Features
Click to expand
Judges' pick/Designated 3+ player map
Tidehunter
By: KillerSmileAt first all attacks lead through the middle. Use the mineral wall in your natural to expand away from your opponent.Taking down the rocks opens additional attack paths to the otherwise very well protected expansions. In the very middle there is a watchtower. Actually using the feature of a second mineral walled entrance in the natural helps the map counter the asymmetrical aspects of a close spawn on a 4 player rotational map. The single path through the middle keeps rush distances similar to each other and prevents close spawns hyper-aggressive by default.
Map Features
Click to expand
Voting
TLMC uses a voting system where voters assign points to their top five maps in order of preference. Please follow these instructions when voting:
You may only vote for a total of FIVE (5) maps.
Among your top five maps picks, assign your points/votes as follows:
Highest rated map: 5 points
Second highest rated map: 4 points
Third highest rated map: 3 points
Fourth highest rated map: 2 points
Fifth highest rated map: 1 point
You may only assign each specific point value once (only one map can be awarded 5 points, etc).
Public voting via TL.net determines the final rankings in TLMC #15. All sixteen finalists, as selected by the judges, receive $200 per winning entry. The top five entrants, as determined by public vote, will be awarded additional winnings as follows:
First - $800 Second - $500 Third - $250 Fourth - $150 Fifth - $100
Maps that place high in TLMC #15 are not guaranteed to be added to the competitive ladder. ESL and Blizzard will reference TLMC #15 and choose which maps to add at their own discretion.
Prize money has been provided by Shopify and ESL, and we thank them for their support of the map making community.
Congrats to everyone who got into the top 16, especially to the new guys I'd like to give a shoutout to KillerSmile, ZigguratOfUr and Pklixian who were always there to provide feedback and suggestions.
congrats and thank you to all the finalists! most of the maps are already up on EU and more added everytime I refresh so try them out guys (just search for TLMC15) :D!
I have some doubts about the maps with the Acropolis-style super close thirds (Sanguinite, Bulwark) in this meta as well as general worries about the rush maps (where it feels the judges repeat the same mistakes over and over and can never find a balanced one), but it should make for a nice map test tournament.
And yeah its too bad that multi-level got confined to Freestyle, since we only ended up with one truly freestyle map (Treadmill). The other maps are nice but should have qualified through standard or macro ideally.
Many congrats to all the mappers that got their maps in!
Am I reading this right? Does it say "voting"? :D
I'll probably wait with my vote til the end and see what the tournament holds, but I can see why it's nice to be able to point at this thread during the tournament so people can take action as soon as they make their mind up. Especially looking forward to the games on the 4p maps.
Awesome to see soo many new name make it in! Great quality top to bottom. Hats off to the judges for narrowing down such a huge field. Really hope to see 5+ of these on ladder ASAP. TLMC is better than Christmas
It is also quite disappointing that the judges ended up picking a bunch of 4p rotational maps--three of which do similar blocking of the close by ground spawns with minerals or rocks (like Nautilus). It's just too much of the same stuff.
They should have picked some of the reflect symmetry maps, or 3p maps. And some of the reflect symmetry maps were better than the rotational maps anyways. Biosphere in particular was really good (https://i.imgur.com/dV8O4wx.png), but there were others.
The multi spawn subcategory should definitely had slots for different style of maps. - Best 3p map - Best 4p rotational map - Best 4p reflection map - Wildcard (anything but not 4p rotation)
I don't mean to be a debbie downer, but I'm actually kind of disappointed with the overall finalists selection this year. There are a couple of good maps there that I really like, but most of them didn't make it that I think would have been truly interesting to play on. I think there were a few missed opportunities here.
Grats to Milo though! You were right about your Curious Minds map making the rush finalists. It's a very nice map and I was really with you in hoping Hardwire would make it to the finalists as well though. One of the very best maps I've played on. Glad to see one of his maps still made it in Jacaranda.
With all that being said, congratulations to all of the finalists. Very much looking forward to the voting phase.
Two of the Freestyle finalists are merely normal maps that happen to have a slightly higher ramp to the main. Only Treadmill is really pushing a concept (and will definitely get my vote for that). Tidehunter's weird pillars around the middle may be interesting too, even if they are not as map-defining as Treadmill's speed zones - but that map is in Judge's Pick, not Freestyle.
All Judge's Picks (except Tidehunter, again) being 4p rotational with bases in typical corner positions is such a bland choice. I was really hoping for more diversity.
Regardless, I am eager to see what the games in the tournament look like
On July 04 2021 02:50 Apom wrote: I share Ziggurat's sentiment on both points.
Two of the Freestyle finalists are merely normal maps that happen to have a slightly higher ramp to the main. Only Treadmill is really pushing a concept (and will definitely get my vote for that). Tidehunter's weird pillars around the middle may be interesting too, even if they are not as map-defining as Treadmill's speed zones - but that map is in Judge's Pick, not Freestyle.
All Judge's Picks (except Tidehunter, again) being 4p rotational with bases in typical corner positions is such a bland choice. I was really hoping for more diversity.
Regardless, I am eager to see what the games in the tournament look like
On July 04 2021 02:50 Apom wrote: I share Ziggurat's sentiment on both points.
Two of the Freestyle finalists are merely normal maps that happen to have a slightly higher ramp to the main. Only Treadmill is really pushing a concept (and will definitely get my vote for that). Tidehunter's weird pillars around the middle may be interesting too, even if they are not as map-defining as Treadmill's speed zones - but that map is in Judge's Pick, not Freestyle.
All Judge's Picks (except Tidehunter, again) being 4p rotational with bases in typical corner positions is such a bland choice. I was really hoping for more diversity.
Regardless, I am eager to see what the games in the tournament look like
Tidehunter has a rotational symmetry as well.
Oh you are right, it is mirrorish but actually rotational. The others are plain rotational so I got caught off guard!
Nice selection, but my top 14 didn't get in (my personal 15th was Scavenger).
While I think Aqueducts doesn't have the most interesting use of color and texture, it has a superior layout that exceeds all other maps. Definitely giving that one of my top votes.
Looking forward to seeing them in action in the Wardi Show.
Why didn't they just make it so voting doesn't open till the first day of the tournament that way you at least see how some of these play out? You'll still get like 6 days to vote that way, but until then we can at least look over the selection.
I know my initial top 5 but I'm excited to test them and then see how the top players use them as well before finalizing anything. I will say, narrowing it down from my top 10 to my top 5 was very hard, great group of maps, nice work and congrats map makers.
I voted already myself since these maps are on battlenet already and I've played on some of them multiple times.
I feel like it's the same story as with the other map contests though. The more interesting, dynamic, and fun maps are beaten out by some rather bland and very standard maps, besides a few exceptions.
Some good maps that I like, but if I were to condense some of my thoughts I would say:
-In hindsight, confining 4 and 5 level maps to Freestyle makes very little sense. Either maps with more playable levels are worthy design wise, or they're not, but confining them to a single category when extra cliff levels aren't something that make or break map designs, it mostly served to push out anything else in Freestyle that was actually more "out there".
-Likewise, opening up voting now doesn't make very much sense. While players are free to consult the list of finalists and try those maps out themselves, a lot of people won't go to the effort of doing that, and there's still the tournament left to be played. But as it is, the 1st place map will be decided when there's still a chance for players and spectators to find out they actually don't like it that much. The 1st place map turning out to be hated and getting memed on has happened before.
-For a contest that was supposed to emphasize 3+ spawn maps and look to expand the gameplay horizons again, it's pretty disappointing to see only the bare minimum number of 4p maps chosen, and they also seem fairly similar to one another at a glance. This kinda leads to my final point.
-None of the finalists are bad. They're all quite well made, and I would have chosen a few of them myself if I had any say. However, this contest seems to me to be falling into a familiar trap, where not only do very standard maps tend to do better, the entirety of the finalists, taken together, don't have a ton of variety. Like the pre-approved list of map features was decided on, and they looked for a set of maps that pretty much nail that list. It doesn't feel like finalists were chosen with an awareness of what the complete list would look like, they're just all individually solid maps.
Overall, even if I extract myself from the picture, this leaves a pretty sour taste in my mouth. Sure, I committed to the 4 spawn prompt myself, and I'm bummed that I lost out entirely, but some mapmakers like Semmo only submitted 4 spawn maps, and if there was any expectation that 2 spawn maps would pretty much still carry the day I don't know that they would have bothered. And I wouldn't blame them. "Maps with 3+ spawns" ended up being tacked on as another category, since otherwise we didn't see any. It feels like an afterthought, like you had to choose 4 maps but didn't want to.
Maps need to be an avenue that really gets pushed if we want the game to remain interesting, and I would loathe to be silent when I legitimately feel like there are efforts that aren't really being taken. Kinda disappointing overall, again even if I subtract myself from the picture. For all the things this contest was supposed to do differently and improve on, it feels a lot like nothing has changed.
Lots of great looking maps here! At first glance, the maps that strike my fancy for each category are Jacaranda (Standard), Berlingrad (Rush), Sanguinite (Macro), and Treadmill (Freestyle), but I'll reserve my vote until after the TLMC Tourney next week.
On July 04 2021 14:28 4096SP wrote: I hope these maps can be published in China server.
I don't think the organizers have a CN Starcraft account. The maps are published as unlocked so someone with a CN account could download them to reupload them to China server.
On July 04 2021 14:28 4096SP wrote: I hope these maps can be published in China server.
I don't think the organizers have a CN Starcraft account. The maps are published as unlocked so someone with a CN account could download them to reupload them to China server.
Oh no, instant voting? SHIT i hoped i could fix the texturing in iteration phase BEFORE voting :D thats disappointing... it looks pretty trash currently.. I did not have time to do this before the deadline on all of the maps its gonna look good in the future, trust me :D
First: Congrats to all finalists. It's really nice to have so many dedicated to create more SC2 content. Its quite a big effort to get maps in such quality.
Having that said, i am pretty disappointed with the finalists. Not the individual Maps, but the List in total. I don't think the judges have to be blamed, but the point system that brings together their judgement. (I agree mostly with what NewSunshine wrote)
Especially the Freestyle category makes me sad. There is only one actual freestyle layout with treadmill and this doesn't even have more layers. There is zero maps that showcase 4 levels (don't even think about 5). OK Pride of Altaris is at least giving the Main its own level. the other maps are just not fulfilling the intention of this category.
As people before me wrote this has to do with the way the category was setup (Multi level limited to this) but in my opinion its not only that. There where many maps in the submissions that are really freestyle and there where many maps that tried to make something happen with all 5 levels. (maybe not both at the same time) so there are two slots waisted to maps that don't belong there. (not saying they are bad)
Whats the takeaway? The process to setup the list of finalists needs some kind of curator who is not just adding up the points given by the judges, but who looks at the full list and picks maps with different qualities as per intention of the categories. For example such a curator would avoid having only 4p rotational maps among the multi spawn maps.
Really looking forward to the tournament to make up my votes, but I have to admit i have a strong Bias for Treadmill (only freestyle map) and Aqueducts.
I'm not voting before a tournament, but I can already say which maps will be fun to watch:
Fountainhead : a flexible wall off with destructible rocks, interesting high ground areas that will serve for proxying and sieging accompanied by low ground Los blockers that make that area dangerous in the early to mid game. Additionally, the forward bases with geysers pointing towards the enemy don't seem easy to take, which is a plus from me.
Aqueducts: positioning bases forward will make late game more dynamic. Even though the textures aren't convincing, the layout is top notch.
I'm not sure about the others. Curious Minds is a bit more experimental with 2 xel Naga on such a small area and plenty of flanking options, but with both bases exposed to siege tanks at the same time.
I wish the Freestyle category was more varied, because the only innovative map there is Zweck's Treadmill, rest of them look standard.
I lack experience to judge 4p spawns maps, but they might bring assymetries that much needed in competitive play. We will see how they play out.
On July 04 2021 17:10 Zweck wrote: Oh no, instant voting? SHIT i hoped i could fix the texturing in iteration phase BEFORE voting :D thats disappointing... it looks pretty trash currently.. I did not have time to do this before the deadline an all of the maps its gonna look good in the future, trust me :D
gz to all the finalists! great maps
We trust you senpai! Maplayout is once again top notch <3
On July 04 2021 18:11 StarWars1 wrote: Especially the Freestyle category makes me sad. There is only one actual freestyle layout with treadmill and this doesn't even have more layers. There is zero maps that showcase 4 levels (don't even think about 5). OK Pride of Altaris is at least giving the Main its own level. the other maps are just not fulfilling the intention of this category.
Yamatai also has a main on its own level. Still agree on everything
On July 04 2021 18:11 StarWars1 wrote: Especially the Freestyle category makes me sad. There is only one actual freestyle layout with treadmill and this doesn't even have more layers. There is zero maps that showcase 4 levels (don't even think about 5). OK Pride of Altaris is at least giving the Main its own level. the other maps are just not fulfilling the intention of this category.
Yamatai also has a main on its own level. Still agree on everything
Actually it uses also 3rd cliff level at 3 and 9 o'clock bases. This isn't usually done as if it is close to main, then it can create problems with stalkers and tanks for example. The texturing is confusing.
Have to agree with some of the comment, at least on that none of the 3p spawn maps made it. Those are particularly interesting because they are inherently impossible to get a clear map split, which gives more interesting late-game fights as well.
Heart of the Void is one I would have liked to see in for example (and there were others I liked that had 3p rotational).
Ah Yes I see it now. I was confused by the texture. (should have opened it in game before complaining) I have to apologize here, Yamatai looks a bit more interesting now. Let's see in the tournament.
However, this dosn't change my sentiment on the list of finalists and the process behind.
On July 04 2021 18:14 MiloOnFire wrote: I'm not voting before a tournament, but I can already say which maps will be fun to watch:
Fountainhead : a flexible wall off with destructible rocks, interesting high ground areas that will serve for proxying and sieging accompanied by low ground Los blockers that make that area dangerous in the early to mid game. Additionally, the forward bases with geysers pointing towards the enemy don't seem easy to take, which is a plus from me.
Aqueducts: positioning bases forward will make late game more dynamic. Even though the textures aren't convincing, the layout is top notch.
I'm not sure about the others. Curious Minds is a bit more experimental with 2 xel Naga on such a small area and plenty of flanking options, but with both bases exposed to siege tanks at the same time.
I wish the Freestyle category was more varied, because the only innovative map there is Zweck's Treadmill, rest of them look standard.
I lack experience to judge 4p spawns maps, but they might bring assymetries that much needed in competitive play. We will see how they play out.
I'm looking forward to the tournament
Agree with you on Fountainhead and Aqueducts. For me these are probably the two best maps of the finalists, or at least the most intriguing. Also agree with everyone about the freestyle category. I was hoping something like Xibalba or Hexmaster would make the cut.
After you mentioned Hardwire, I looked into the map myself and really enjoyed playing on it. Any thoughts as to why you liked it and maybe why it didn't make the finalists? Hoping it is still a map we might see sometime in the future.
I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
On July 05 2021 00:21 Darpa wrote: Couple i really like.
Lots of these maps seem to just have an obscenely huge number of choke hallways and siegable naturals from a choked off location.
I dont think necessarily just putting more "stuff" (rocks, walls, mineral lines, vision reducers) on every single map is better.
Bulwark is the worst offender from what I've seen. Not sure why it was a finalist considering the handful amount of issues it has, and also the fact that it's considered a macro map, which is a category that probably had the best maps submitted of the contest. None of them outside of maybe Fountainhead were chosen.
On July 04 2021 09:00 NewSunshine wrote: Some good maps that I like, but if I were to condense some of my thoughts I would say:
-In hindsight, confining 4 and 5 level maps to Freestyle makes very little sense. Either maps with more playable levels are worthy design wise, or they're not, but confining them to a single category when extra cliff levels aren't something that make or break map designs, it mostly served to push out anything else in Freestyle that was actually more "out there".
-Likewise, opening up voting now doesn't make very much sense. While players are free to consult the list of finalists and try those maps out themselves, a lot of people won't go to the effort of doing that, and there's still the tournament left to be played. But as it is, the 1st place map will be decided when there's still a chance for players and spectators to find out they actually don't like it that much. The 1st place map turning out to be hated and getting memed on has happened before.
-For a contest that was supposed to emphasize 3+ spawn maps and look to expand the gameplay horizons again, it's pretty disappointing to see only the bare minimum number of 4p maps chosen, and they also seem fairly similar to one another at a glance. This kinda leads to my final point.
-None of the finalists are bad. They're all quite well made, and I would have chosen a few of them myself if I had any say. However, this contest seems to me to be falling into a familiar trap, where not only do very standard maps tend to do better, the entirety of the finalists, taken together, don't have a ton of variety. Like the pre-approved list of map features was decided on, and they looked for a set of maps that pretty much nail that list. It doesn't feel like finalists were chosen with an awareness of what the complete list would look like, they're just all individually solid maps.
Overall, even if I extract myself from the picture, this leaves a pretty sour taste in my mouth. Sure, I committed to the 4 spawn prompt myself, and I'm bummed that I lost out entirely, but some mapmakers like Semmo only submitted 4 spawn maps, and if there was any expectation that 2 spawn maps would pretty much still carry the day I don't know that they would have bothered. And I wouldn't blame them. "Maps with 3+ spawns" ended up being tacked on as another category, since otherwise we didn't see any. It feels like an afterthought, like you had to choose 4 maps but didn't want to.
Maps need to be an avenue that really gets pushed if we want the game to remain interesting, and I would loathe to be silent when I legitimately feel like there are efforts that aren't really being taken. Kinda disappointing overall, again even if I subtract myself from the picture. For all the things this contest was supposed to do differently and improve on, it feels a lot like nothing has changed.
I feel like the 4p maps were just tacked on for the sake of it. Jacaranda is ok, but the other ones I feel like should have never made the finalists especially since there were so many other good 2p or 4p maps submitted. I don't think they chose the best 4p maps of the bunch by any stretch.
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Ah yes, clearly it's malevolence and unfair bias rather than something that is fundamental to how the level design for this 11 year old established multiplayer game works.
Are these the kind of takes I got to have to become a writer on this site?
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Not every map has an overlord pillar in the natural expansion, so it's a bit lazy of you to assume something without paying attention to the layouts. Other than that, it would be nice to hear some positives. I think, that all of the maps need constructive critisicm, not only biased opinions. (Let's reinforce good habits instead of punishing us for making creative, yet still standard layouts).
On July 04 2021 01:45 ZigguratOfUr wrote: It is also quite disappointing that the judges ended up picking a bunch of 4p rotational maps--three of which do similar blocking of the close by ground spawns with minerals or rocks (like Nautilus). It's just too much of the same stuff.
They should have picked some of the reflect symmetry maps, or 3p maps. And some of the reflect symmetry maps were better than the rotational maps anyways. Biosphere in particular was really good (https://i.imgur.com/dV8O4wx.png), but there were others.
I think your White Sands was a good example of what you're talking about as well. Have enjoyed playing on that one and hate to see that none of your submitted maps made the cut. I think all of them would have been interesting to play on the ladder(especially grand canal hehe :D).
On July 04 2021 09:00 NewSunshine wrote: Some good maps that I like, but if I were to condense some of my thoughts I would say:
-In hindsight, confining 4 and 5 level maps to Freestyle makes very little sense. Either maps with more playable levels are worthy design wise, or they're not, but confining them to a single category when extra cliff levels aren't something that make or break map designs, it mostly served to push out anything else in Freestyle that was actually more "out there".
-Likewise, opening up voting now doesn't make very much sense. While players are free to consult the list of finalists and try those maps out themselves, a lot of people won't go to the effort of doing that, and there's still the tournament left to be played. But as it is, the 1st place map will be decided when there's still a chance for players and spectators to find out they actually don't like it that much. The 1st place map turning out to be hated and getting memed on has happened before.
-For a contest that was supposed to emphasize 3+ spawn maps and look to expand the gameplay horizons again, it's pretty disappointing to see only the bare minimum number of 4p maps chosen, and they also seem fairly similar to one another at a glance. This kinda leads to my final point.
-None of the finalists are bad. They're all quite well made, and I would have chosen a few of them myself if I had any say. However, this contest seems to me to be falling into a familiar trap, where not only do very standard maps tend to do better, the entirety of the finalists, taken together, don't have a ton of variety. Like the pre-approved list of map features was decided on, and they looked for a set of maps that pretty much nail that list. It doesn't feel like finalists were chosen with an awareness of what the complete list would look like, they're just all individually solid maps.
Overall, even if I extract myself from the picture, this leaves a pretty sour taste in my mouth. Sure, I committed to the 4 spawn prompt myself, and I'm bummed that I lost out entirely, but some mapmakers like Semmo only submitted 4 spawn maps, and if there was any expectation that 2 spawn maps would pretty much still carry the day I don't know that they would have bothered. And I wouldn't blame them. "Maps with 3+ spawns" ended up being tacked on as another category, since otherwise we didn't see any. It feels like an afterthought, like you had to choose 4 maps but didn't want to.
Maps need to be an avenue that really gets pushed if we want the game to remain interesting, and I would loathe to be silent when I legitimately feel like there are efforts that aren't really being taken. Kinda disappointing overall, again even if I subtract myself from the picture. For all the things this contest was supposed to do differently and improve on, it feels a lot like nothing has changed.
I feel like the 4p maps were just tacked on for the sake of it. Jacaranda is ok, but the other ones I feel like should have never made the finalists especially since there were so many other good 2p or 4p maps submitted. I don't think they chose the best 4p maps of the bunch by any stretch.
From where I'm sitting, the expectations for this contest were not managed well. Bringing 4-spawn maps back should not have been such a selling point to begin with if they weren't going to seriously try to push from that angle. It's not a focus of this competition to bring them back if they're still going to get rated poorly in whatever scoring system was used, and then added on at the end. Like we're lucky to have the 4 maps we got. We have seen some amazing 4-spawn maps in TLMC in the past, even winning contests and reshaping the competitive map scene, when they were actually given a chance. It feels all too much to me like we'd rather pick maps that are already balanced than try to push the issue and ask for the game to change. Even though that's the entire point. That's why new maps get made, end of discussion. If you didn't want new maps to change gameplay you have everything you should ever need already on ladder.
Im not a protoss player so i might be missing something here, but isnt this walloff bad for protoss vs zerg on treadmill? Should the ramp not be smaller?
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
How about we remove main ramps, I hear from reliable sources than Terran are shamelessly abusing them by using supply depots to wall off and THEN have the audacity to lower their depots to not get stuck inside, clearly abusing map features with race-exclusive mechanis
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Ah yes, clearly it's malevolence and unfair bias rather than something that is fundamental to how the level design for this 11 year old established multiplayer game works.
Are these the kind of takes I got to have to become a writer on this site?
1.-Not malevolence, but certainly biased, probably subconciously. Those free scouting spots where created years ago when it was very hard to scout for zerg, and very easy to deny scouting. Protoss specially had lots of disgusting cheeses and all-in early options that often looked similar if you didn't scout everything. Since then most protoss early all-ins were nerfed into the ground and delayed, and scouting has been made easier for zerg as they increased the baseline movement speed of the overlords. On top of that map layouts, improved creep spread and the different lotv eco have made it easier for zerg to react to pushes. We have had 3 years of zerg dominance before 2021, and I believe in part decisions in the layout of the maps like this contributed a small ammount to that. Why should zergs get a spot made specifically just for them?
Specially vs Protoss this gives them in plenty of maps full view of the wall, and on some even view of the gas. This makes it very easy for zerg to know when and how to atack if they are planing an all-in, of which they have plenty of options. To the point where now the roles have been reversed and Protoss is the one with trouble scuting early game, relying mostly on an adept to scout. If the adept is killed then you're blind. Other scouting methods have their costs, hallucination tkaes away energy, so if you scout an all-in and they are already coming you don't have forcefields, also you might need a sentry that you might not have. Scans cost mules. Overlords are something you are making anyway, why should you get free early game scout?
We have had maps where there are no insivible pillars outside the base and we see zerg still able to scout, just not for free and for a shorter period of time, just like the other races. Proving that they don't really need this advantage, and if removed it could open other openings for Terran and Protoss that are not viable in those maps.
On July 05 2021 22:43 MiloOnFire wrote:
Not every map has an overlord pillar in the natural expansion, so it's a bit lazy of you to assume something without paying attention to the layouts. Other than that, it would be nice to hear some positives. I think, that all of the maps need constructive critisicm, not only biased opinions. (Let's reinforce good habits instead of punishing us for making creative, yet still standard layouts).
Yeah sorry, I expressed myself incorrectly. Didn't mean to say that every map has that, I'm just dissapointed that at least half the maps do, I thought we could move on from that. Like I said I believe that invisible pilar to be a remnant of the past, that map makers have continued to put there without realizing it's not necessary anymore and it's just giving the zergs a small, but nedless, advantage.
For the guy saying that ramps and depots would be unfair, that's not the same situation, as depots were made specifically by the designers of the game to be able to do that, and ramps were also created with that combination in mind. The very first map you used to play, Xel'Naga caverns, had the ramp in that configuration. Whereas the overlord invisible spot was made specifically by map makers later on (for valid reasons at the time, just not anymore).
Appart from that, I like the maps. I think they are a little bit more standard than I thought, even the weird ones. One of this maps is already played in the GSL right? Why is that? Though I must say I like it.
I only have reservations about Treadmill. I like the concept of the slow and fast zones, I just think it needs a little bit of work. I haven't had the chance to play it, but I can see Terran being very powerful in the base with slow zones on the ramp. How are you supposed to atack there if when the terran has the high ground, slow zones on the ramps and tanks or libs? As for the speed zones, their placement still makes the route to get to the enemy side of the map very slow as the path is curved, so while it will be used as an alternative atack zone/harass zone, I don't feel like the speed zones will meaningfully help there.
It's only 6 out of the 16, so not half of them. Besides why is it that terrans always complain about overlord spots, and insist that unwallable reaper jump up spots are absolutely needed?
So first day of tournament is over. My Take: -I start to like Yamatai. A lot. -I would bet that Aqueducts will go on Ladder no mater the outcome of this TLMC. -Curious Minds is so fancy I want to like it, but i don't think it will play out well. -We will never see the full potential of Treadmill. The short air distance between the mains is just too tempting. -This TLMC will not create more acceptance for multispawn Maps.
The first day was a blast. My first take: - Aqueducts turned out to be a great and interesting map, definitely my top 1 atm. - Rush maps were decent, with Iliad and Curious Minds living up to my expectations (the game of Lambo vs uThermal!)! (Berlingrad as well, but being a bit too open in some places? It might due to Clem having a bad day.) - other 2p maps didn't have a chance to shine yet, so looking forward to tomorrow (although I liked Sanguinite and Enchanted Isles (not the middle though, as it's hard to contest it and I feel like bases might be too good to camp) ) - 4p maps felt really forced, generally too big and awkward to maneuver, although I liked Tidehunter a bit
The game on Enchanted Isle did worry me a bit. It was a very non-contact and macro (Wardi does discuss this a bit), which while it can make your map look good in the contest doesn't always translate into a good map in the long term.
For example Apotheosis finished second in TLMC7 off of a bunch of macro games (and maybe a tank push or two), but was an awfully poorly balanced map overall.
On July 07 2021 22:12 dspnebula wrote: Will we get these new maps in the upcoming season?
Probably not. There is only a week after the voting and tournament ends before next season starts. That week is meant for iteration so that map makers can fix any issues before map is given to ESL/Blizzard. Usually the map requires some QA from Blizzard and there isn't really time for it now. However newest maps in ladder had very little QA done to them. So it could be possible that they push some maps to ladder already. There is still maps from the previous contest that could be used.
I don't agree with some previous posts complaining about overlord pillars. I don't mean every maps should have those, but it's just like alot of other stuff to take into account when making a map, it's just more or less map features. The thing is, as much as we want to introduce new features, we're kind of biased to keep the old features thinking it would make the game unbalanced. But just like time proved it in the past, things tends to balance out by themself as people figure the new strategies around the new map features.
Example of old map features that are hard to change.
Ramp orientation always requiring to be diagonal
Overlord pillar
Reaper jump pad
Making main cliffs less reachable to prevent mass stalker blink
Air space around each expansions to prevent ease of drop, liberator, tempest, etc.
Base layouts in triangle or linear or one expand in the back
Distance between base for queen marching offcreep
The necessity to be able to wall with three 3x3 structures
Having cannon rush placements
Having proxy placements
Having a healty amount of bases 12-16 (imagine a map with only gold minerals and less bases!)
Having specefic ramp to ramp timings
Not having island to prevent terran favored
etc.
And considering all the other stuff
Choosing to add or not Xel'Naga tower
Choosing to add or not mineral walls
Choosing to add or not Rocks
Choosing to add or not line of sight blocker
Choosing to add or not speed effects
Choosing to add or not air blocker
Choosing to add or not high yield minerals or geysers
Considering not too open path to prevent easy surrounds
Considering not too narrow path to prevent air favored army
Etc.
Map design feels stuck because of all the past years in the same design and also because the game is balanced around that design and making a map stand out would make it instant veto because it doesn't follow the standar rules. I miss special maps with very original and unique neverseen things before (Think of Golden Wall for example, new and neverseen, at first people did not like it, then eventually there were some nice game played and it became fun). Contest like this one should promote original ideas and not copy old ways of doing things. It doesn't mean to redesign the whole game, but making the map a bit stand out of the box, yeah clearly this is a need.
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Ah yes, clearly it's malevolence and unfair bias rather than something that is fundamental to how the level design for this 11 year old established multiplayer game works.
Are these the kind of takes I got to have to become a writer on this site?
1.-Not malevolence, but certainly biased, probably subconciously. Those free scouting spots where created years ago when it was very hard to scout for zerg, and very easy to deny scouting. Protoss specially had lots of disgusting cheeses and all-in early options that often looked similar if you didn't scout everything. Since then most protoss early all-ins were nerfed into the ground and delayed, and scouting has been made easier for zerg as they increased the baseline movement speed of the overlords. On top of that map layouts, improved creep spread and the different lotv eco have made it easier for zerg to react to pushes. We have had 3 years of zerg dominance before 2021, and I believe in part decisions in the layout of the maps like this contributed a small ammount to that. Why should zergs get a spot made specifically just for them?
Specially vs Protoss this gives them in plenty of maps full view of the wall, and on some even view of the gas. This makes it very easy for zerg to know when and how to atack if they are planing an all-in, of which they have plenty of options. To the point where now the roles have been reversed and Protoss is the one with trouble scuting early game, relying mostly on an adept to scout. If the adept is killed then you're blind. Other scouting methods have their costs, hallucination tkaes away energy, so if you scout an all-in and they are already coming you don't have forcefields, also you might need a sentry that you might not have. Scans cost mules. Overlords are something you are making anyway, why should you get free early game scout?
We have had maps where there are no insivible pillars outside the base and we see zerg still able to scout, just not for free and for a shorter period of time, just like the other races. Proving that they don't really need this advantage, and if removed it could open other openings for Terran and Protoss that are not viable in those maps.
Not every map has an overlord pillar in the natural expansion, so it's a bit lazy of you to assume something without paying attention to the layouts. Other than that, it would be nice to hear some positives. I think, that all of the maps need constructive critisicm, not only biased opinions. (Let's reinforce good habits instead of punishing us for making creative, yet still standard layouts).
Yeah sorry, I expressed myself incorrectly. Didn't mean to say that every map has that, I'm just dissapointed that at least half the maps do, I thought we could move on from that. Like I said I believe that invisible pilar to be a remnant of the past, that map makers have continued to put there without realizing it's not necessary anymore and it's just giving the zergs a small, but nedless, advantage.
For the guy saying that ramps and depots would be unfair, that's not the same situation, as depots were made specifically by the designers of the game to be able to do that, and ramps were also created with that combination in mind. The very first map you used to play, Xel'Naga caverns, had the ramp in that configuration. Whereas the overlord invisible spot was made specifically by map makers later on (for valid reasons at the time, just not anymore).
Appart from that, I like the maps. I think they are a little bit more standard than I thought, even the weird ones. One of this maps is already played in the GSL right? Why is that? Though I must say I like it.
I only have reservations about Treadmill. I like the concept of the slow and fast zones, I just think it needs a little bit of work. I haven't had the chance to play it, but I can see Terran being very powerful in the base with slow zones on the ramp. How are you supposed to atack there if when the terran has the high ground, slow zones on the ramps and tanks or libs? As for the speed zones, their placement still makes the route to get to the enemy side of the map very slow as the path is curved, so while it will be used as an alternative atack zone/harass zone, I don't feel like the speed zones will meaningfully help there.
Hey, great that you clarified your position properly so we can have a discussion. Calling it "shameless favoring of one race" to me kinda implies that mapmakers are malevolent, but apparently you meant to imply mapmakers are ignorant, both of which I take offense with obviously, hence the not so nice response on my part.
I'll try to give you my point of view so we can get past that. What you say about the PvZ matchup and how it developed certainly is correct to some degree and even in TvZ scouting an early moveout for free does not seem fair.
For Overlord Pillars we have like 4 basic options:
1: Lightshade: it corners the far side of the nat choke and sees every moveout 2: Deathaura: further out but also on the main attack path 3: Oxide/Jagannatha: the "fake" pillar on the close side of the nat entrance that can be seen from the main, but doesn't see every moveout 4: Triton: Same side as Lightshade, but does not see a moveout
If you're complaining about #1 I'm actually with you. I think the overlord should have to move to scout, so I personally like #4 generally, but if the specific map asks for other solutions I'll use those, because different maps should be allowed to have different types of pillars.
You compare Overlords to other types of scouting units and say that they are "basically free" because Zerg has to make them anyway, but you conveniently leave out that why Zerg has to make them anyway. Losing the Overlord and getting supplyblocked is super debilitating. No mapmaker wants that to decide a game on their map. Not in the GSL and not in gold league. It feels horrible to be punished for scouting, something that you want to teach the player is a good thing to do in a strategy game. Obviously I don't have to teach that to pro players, but even they hate it when their build gets completely screwed because they had no place to retreat their flying supply depot to.
For you this might be a giant balance discussion and you might call my arguments bullshit and say that the gold leaguers just have to get good, or that this is all a sham and a conspiracy and that the mapmakers have all been duped by Big Zerg or whatever into thinking that the convenience of an overlord spot is necessary when it's only there to give the pro zergs an unfair advantage. Mapmakers are desigers of competitve multiplayer levels. We try to make them nice to play on. Losing the Overlord doesn't feel nice. Should we sometimes put more thought into which type of pillar to use? Yeah ofc. Should we just get rid of them all on every map? Fuck no.
On July 06 2021 12:33 -NegativeZero- wrote: Can you list the map sizes in the OP so we can get a sense of scale without having to manually open each one in the editor?
I second this just so pro players stop calling rush maps big.
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Ah yes, clearly it's malevolence and unfair bias rather than something that is fundamental to how the level design for this 11 year old established multiplayer game works.
Are these the kind of takes I got to have to become a writer on this site?
1.-Not malevolence, but certainly biased, probably subconciously. Those free scouting spots where created years ago when it was very hard to scout for zerg, and very easy to deny scouting. Protoss specially had lots of disgusting cheeses and all-in early options that often looked similar if you didn't scout everything. Since then most protoss early all-ins were nerfed into the ground and delayed, and scouting has been made easier for zerg as they increased the baseline movement speed of the overlords. On top of that map layouts, improved creep spread and the different lotv eco have made it easier for zerg to react to pushes. We have had 3 years of zerg dominance before 2021, and I believe in part decisions in the layout of the maps like this contributed a small ammount to that. Why should zergs get a spot made specifically just for them?
Specially vs Protoss this gives them in plenty of maps full view of the wall, and on some even view of the gas. This makes it very easy for zerg to know when and how to atack if they are planing an all-in, of which they have plenty of options. To the point where now the roles have been reversed and Protoss is the one with trouble scuting early game, relying mostly on an adept to scout. If the adept is killed then you're blind. Other scouting methods have their costs, hallucination tkaes away energy, so if you scout an all-in and they are already coming you don't have forcefields, also you might need a sentry that you might not have. Scans cost mules. Overlords are something you are making anyway, why should you get free early game scout?
We have had maps where there are no insivible pillars outside the base and we see zerg still able to scout, just not for free and for a shorter period of time, just like the other races. Proving that they don't really need this advantage, and if removed it could open other openings for Terran and Protoss that are not viable in those maps.
On July 05 2021 22:43 MiloOnFire wrote:
Not every map has an overlord pillar in the natural expansion, so it's a bit lazy of you to assume something without paying attention to the layouts. Other than that, it would be nice to hear some positives. I think, that all of the maps need constructive critisicm, not only biased opinions. (Let's reinforce good habits instead of punishing us for making creative, yet still standard layouts).
Yeah sorry, I expressed myself incorrectly. Didn't mean to say that every map has that, I'm just dissapointed that at least half the maps do, I thought we could move on from that. Like I said I believe that invisible pilar to be a remnant of the past, that map makers have continued to put there without realizing it's not necessary anymore and it's just giving the zergs a small, but nedless, advantage.
For the guy saying that ramps and depots would be unfair, that's not the same situation, as depots were made specifically by the designers of the game to be able to do that, and ramps were also created with that combination in mind. The very first map you used to play, Xel'Naga caverns, had the ramp in that configuration. Whereas the overlord invisible spot was made specifically by map makers later on (for valid reasons at the time, just not anymore).
Appart from that, I like the maps. I think they are a little bit more standard than I thought, even the weird ones. One of this maps is already played in the GSL right? Why is that? Though I must say I like it.
I only have reservations about Treadmill. I like the concept of the slow and fast zones, I just think it needs a little bit of work. I haven't had the chance to play it, but I can see Terran being very powerful in the base with slow zones on the ramp. How are you supposed to atack there if when the terran has the high ground, slow zones on the ramps and tanks or libs? As for the speed zones, their placement still makes the route to get to the enemy side of the map very slow as the path is curved, so while it will be used as an alternative atack zone/harass zone, I don't feel like the speed zones will meaningfully help there.
Hey, great that you clarified your position properly so we can have a discussion. Calling it "shameless favoring of one race" to me kinda implies that mapmakers are malevolent, but apparently you meant to imply mapmakers are ignorant, both of which I take offense with obviously, hence the not so nice response on my part.
I'll try to give you my point of view so we can get past that. What you say about the PvZ matchup and how it developed certainly is correct to some degree and even in TvZ scouting an early moveout for free does not seem fair.
For Overlord Pillars we have like 4 basic options:
1: Lightshade: it corners the far side of the nat choke and sees every moveout 2: Deathaura: further out but also on the main attack path 3: Oxide/Jagannatha: the "fake" pillar on the close side of the nat entrance that can be seen from the main, but doesn't see every moveout 4: Triton: Same side as Lightshade, but does not see a moveout
If you're complaining about #1 I'm actually with you. I think the overlord should have to move to scout, so I personally like #4 generally, but if the specific map asks for other solutions I'll use those, because different maps should be allowed to have different types of pillars.
You compare Overlords to other types of scouting units and say that they are "basically free" because Zerg has to make them anyway, but you conveniently leave out that why Zerg has to make them anyway. Losing the Overlord and getting supplyblocked is super debilitating. No mapmaker wants that to decide a game on their map. Not in the GSL and not in gold league. It feels horrible to be punished for scouting, something that you want to teach the player is a good thing to do in a strategy game. Obviously I don't have to teach that to pro players, but even they hate it when their build gets completely screwed because they had no place to retreat their flying supply depot to.
For you this might be a giant balance discussion and you might call my arguments bullshit and say that the gold leaguers just have to get good, or that this is all a sham and a conspiracy and that the mapmakers have all been duped by Big Zerg or whatever into thinking that the convenience of an overlord spot is necessary when it's only there to give the pro zergs an unfair advantage. Mapmakers are desigers of competitve multiplayer levels. We try to make them nice to play on. Losing the Overlord doesn't feel nice. Should we sometimes put more thought into which type of pillar to use? Yeah ofc. Should we just get rid of them all on every map? Fuck no.
There is also the factor of scouting economy with the overlord. Some pillars give you view of gasses or mineral line at natural or allow you to sacrifice the overlord to scout them. Pillars further on side and back of natural are better for this but slack on the view of the choke. For example the pillar at back of natural on Fountainhead. The scout isn't always risk free because opponent can easily have enough units to kill the overlord before it can see the wanted information. For example on Enchanted Isle you can see if one the gasses has been taken, but you don't see how many workers it has and if the second gas has also been taken. To see the second gas you need to sacrifice the overlord, that gives vision on the choke. The map doesn't have any other overlord pillars that allow you to spot moveouts.
If the closest pillar is further outside of natural like on Scavenger and Iliad, the overlord has to pass the choke to scout the mineral line and gasses, and thus make it very risky.
There is of course the possibility of scout from the side of natural, but then the overlord doesn't have view on the choke at all. Look at back of natural in Tidehunter. Also making the side scout good option easily increases effectiveness of other air units, that will use the same air space. Thus this isn't only about overlord scouting anymore, but about air harass and drops too.
On July 06 2021 12:33 -NegativeZero- wrote: Can you list the map sizes in the OP so we can get a sense of scale without having to manually open each one in the editor?
I second this just so pro players stop calling rush maps big.
Probably all information that was required when submitted should be shown. Excluding map file links.
Out of today's games I thought Threadmill was quite impressive even without the topside of the map (which is its selling point) being used--a bit turtly perhaps but the army movement and maneuvering around the bottom of the map looked good. The first four bases are also quite standard so the pros won't mind the map.
Aqueducts seemed even more turtly, perhaps even too turtly with how long armies take to rotate to get different angles of attack.
And zerg spawning clockwise from a terran on Tidehunter seemed quite miserable.
Maybe its this "you only see what you want to see" thing, but the second day just made me like Treadmill and Aqueducts even more. For Treadmill I share Ziggurats opinion. Funny take for Aqueducts: Day 1: "Its so difficult to hold on to those forward bases" Day 2: "If you take those forward bases with your Mech, you are in such a strong position" Yes it looked turtly in that Inno Rogue game, but zest had his difficulties to defend.
Yamatai still grows on me, but had an unlucky game. Still want to like Courious Minds. It looks so cool and the games where entertaining. But still have doubts. 4p Maps presented their known issues. Undercity semes to be more positive received among those, but well its submitted to standard, so there is that. 2p Macro maps all have a fancy middle part which isn't really having any impact. So none of them stand out positive or negative. All of the statements are meant in a relative way, because the Quality of maps in total is really high. There is no Backpfeifengesicht (sadly)
I think the finalists maps are a mixed bag. Ideally the maps I would have included would have been:
Standard Containment White Sands Algor Mortis
Macro Gresvan Hardwire Titan Cosmic
Rush Electric Avenue
Freestyle Hexmaster Xibalba
I do think Fountainhead is a good map from what I've seen thus far, but the rest of the macro category is a massive disappointment, as is the freestyle category. Tidehunter has grown on me, but Bulwark & Undercity are mediocre maps at best. Still very disappointed that Hardwire was not included as a finalist. Has great ladder and tournament map written all over it.
Out of the finalists I hope that Oblivion, Aqueducts, Curious Minds, Illiad, Fountainhead, Treadmill & Tidehunter are future ladder maps. Maybe Jacaranda as well, but I'm still not 100 % sure on that one.
On July 08 2021 09:13 NeuralNet88 wrote: I think the finalists maps are a mixed bag. Ideally the maps I would have included would have been:
Standard Containment White Sands Algor Mortis
Macro Gresvan Hardwire Titan Cosmic
Rush Electric Avenue
Freestyle Hexmaster Xibalba
I do think Fountainhead is a good map from what I've seen thus far, but the rest of the macro category is a massive disappointment, as is the freestyle category. Tidehunter has grown on me, but Bulwark & Undercity are mediocre maps at best. Still very disappointed that Hardwire was not included as a finalist. Has great ladder and tournament map written all over it.
Out of the finalists I hope that Oblivion, Aqueducts, Curious Minds, Illiad, Fountainhead, Treadmill & Tidehunter are future ladder maps. Maybe Jacaranda as well, but I'm still not 100 % sure on that one.
Thank you for the praise on Hardwire, it means a lot. Unless anything unexpected happens, it will have another go in the possible next TLMC. I think Jacaranda, as well as the other maps with 4 starting positions, will need some extra time before we know how well they work, especially because they're all rotational symmetry which brings some pros and cons for each starting location. I do think the Zest v Rouge game looked promising though.
On July 07 2021 23:50 scbroodsc2 wrote: I don't agree with some previous posts complaining about overlord pillars. I don't mean every maps should have those, but it's just like alot of other stuff to take into account when making a map, it's just more or less map features. The thing is, as much as we want to introduce new features, we're kind of biased to keep the old features thinking it would make the game unbalanced. But just like time proved it in the past, things tends to balance out by themself as people figure the new strategies around the new map features.
Example of old map features that are hard to change.
Ramp orientation always requiring to be diagonal
Overlord pillar
Reaper jump pad
Making main cliffs less reachable to prevent mass stalker blink
Air space around each expansions to prevent ease of drop, liberator, tempest, etc.
Base layouts in triangle or linear or one expand in the back
Distance between base for queen marching offcreep
The necessity to be able to wall with three 3x3 structures
Having cannon rush placements
Having proxy placements
Having a healty amount of bases 12-16 (imagine a map with only gold minerals and less bases!)
Having specefic ramp to ramp timings
Not having island to prevent terran favored
etc.
And considering all the other stuff
Choosing to add or not Xel'Naga tower
Choosing to add or not mineral walls
Choosing to add or not Rocks
Choosing to add or not line of sight blocker
Choosing to add or not speed effects
Choosing to add or not air blocker
Choosing to add or not high yield minerals or geysers
Considering not too open path to prevent easy surrounds
Considering not too narrow path to prevent air favored army
Etc.
Map design feels stuck because of all the past years in the same design and also because the game is balanced around that design and making a map stand out would make it instant veto because it doesn't follow the standar rules. I miss special maps with very original and unique neverseen things before (Think of Golden Wall for example, new and neverseen, at first people did not like it, then eventually there were some nice game played and it became fun). Contest like this one should promote original ideas and not copy old ways of doing things. It doesn't mean to redesign the whole game, but making the map a bit stand out of the box, yeah clearly this is a need.
I think this cannot be overstated. Also for new mapmakers, having to abide by all these (hidden) rules makes it a very niche and delicate process to get into, and leaving very little room for real advancements.
On July 08 2021 23:36 Callynn wrote: I think this cannot be overstated. Also for new mapmakers, having to abide by all these (hidden) rules makes it a very niche and delicate process to get into, and leaving very little room for real advancements.
This is basicly what I'm trying to point out, how there are so many little rules that basicly restrict how much a mapmaker can imagine wild new maps. I really wish the game to get more and more fun and a bit less "standar" with very thight build and timings. That's my point of view, that is probably not shared with everyone, but that is fine. A bit of both is totally fine, wild maps and standar maps together.
On July 05 2021 08:28 [Phantom] wrote: I'm still thinking but for now I'll say I'm disappointed that many mapmakers still insist on having that invisible overlord spot to give zergs free scouts all early game. Such shameless favoring of one race has no place in a competitive map pool. Specially after all the buffs Zerg received through the years to facilitate scouting.
Ah yes, clearly it's malevolence and unfair bias rather than something that is fundamental to how the level design for this 11 year old established multiplayer game works.
Are these the kind of takes I got to have to become a writer on this site?
1.-Not malevolence, but certainly biased, probably subconciously. Those free scouting spots where created years ago when it was very hard to scout for zerg, and very easy to deny scouting. Protoss specially had lots of disgusting cheeses and all-in early options that often looked similar if you didn't scout everything. Since then most protoss early all-ins were nerfed into the ground and delayed, and scouting has been made easier for zerg as they increased the baseline movement speed of the overlords. On top of that map layouts, improved creep spread and the different lotv eco have made it easier for zerg to react to pushes. We have had 3 years of zerg dominance before 2021, and I believe in part decisions in the layout of the maps like this contributed a small ammount to that. Why should zergs get a spot made specifically just for them?
Specially vs Protoss this gives them in plenty of maps full view of the wall, and on some even view of the gas. This makes it very easy for zerg to know when and how to atack if they are planing an all-in, of which they have plenty of options. To the point where now the roles have been reversed and Protoss is the one with trouble scuting early game, relying mostly on an adept to scout. If the adept is killed then you're blind. Other scouting methods have their costs, hallucination tkaes away energy, so if you scout an all-in and they are already coming you don't have forcefields, also you might need a sentry that you might not have. Scans cost mules. Overlords are something you are making anyway, why should you get free early game scout?
We have had maps where there are no insivible pillars outside the base and we see zerg still able to scout, just not for free and for a shorter period of time, just like the other races. Proving that they don't really need this advantage, and if removed it could open other openings for Terran and Protoss that are not viable in those maps.
On July 05 2021 22:43 MiloOnFire wrote:
Not every map has an overlord pillar in the natural expansion, so it's a bit lazy of you to assume something without paying attention to the layouts. Other than that, it would be nice to hear some positives. I think, that all of the maps need constructive critisicm, not only biased opinions. (Let's reinforce good habits instead of punishing us for making creative, yet still standard layouts).
Yeah sorry, I expressed myself incorrectly. Didn't mean to say that every map has that, I'm just dissapointed that at least half the maps do, I thought we could move on from that. Like I said I believe that invisible pilar to be a remnant of the past, that map makers have continued to put there without realizing it's not necessary anymore and it's just giving the zergs a small, but nedless, advantage.
For the guy saying that ramps and depots would be unfair, that's not the same situation, as depots were made specifically by the designers of the game to be able to do that, and ramps were also created with that combination in mind. The very first map you used to play, Xel'Naga caverns, had the ramp in that configuration. Whereas the overlord invisible spot was made specifically by map makers later on (for valid reasons at the time, just not anymore).
Appart from that, I like the maps. I think they are a little bit more standard than I thought, even the weird ones. One of this maps is already played in the GSL right? Why is that? Though I must say I like it.
I only have reservations about Treadmill. I like the concept of the slow and fast zones, I just think it needs a little bit of work. I haven't had the chance to play it, but I can see Terran being very powerful in the base with slow zones on the ramp. How are you supposed to atack there if when the terran has the high ground, slow zones on the ramps and tanks or libs? As for the speed zones, their placement still makes the route to get to the enemy side of the map very slow as the path is curved, so while it will be used as an alternative atack zone/harass zone, I don't feel like the speed zones will meaningfully help there.
Hey, great that you clarified your position properly so we can have a discussion. Calling it "shameless favoring of one race" to me kinda implies that mapmakers are malevolent, but apparently you meant to imply mapmakers are ignorant, both of which I take offense with obviously, hence the not so nice response on my part.
I'll try to give you my point of view so we can get past that. What you say about the PvZ matchup and how it developed certainly is correct to some degree and even in TvZ scouting an early moveout for free does not seem fair.
For Overlord Pillars we have like 4 basic options:
1: Lightshade: it corners the far side of the nat choke and sees every moveout 2: Deathaura: further out but also on the main attack path 3: Oxide/Jagannatha: the "fake" pillar on the close side of the nat entrance that can be seen from the main, but doesn't see every moveout 4: Triton: Same side as Lightshade, but does not see a moveout
If you're complaining about #1 I'm actually with you. I think the overlord should have to move to scout, so I personally like #4 generally, but if the specific map asks for other solutions I'll use those, because different maps should be allowed to have different types of pillars.
You compare Overlords to other types of scouting units and say that they are "basically free" because Zerg has to make them anyway, but you conveniently leave out that why Zerg has to make them anyway. Losing the Overlord and getting supplyblocked is super debilitating. No mapmaker wants that to decide a game on their map. Not in the GSL and not in gold league. It feels horrible to be punished for scouting, something that you want to teach the player is a good thing to do in a strategy game. Obviously I don't have to teach that to pro players, but even they hate it when their build gets completely screwed because they had no place to retreat their flying supply depot to.
For you this might be a giant balance discussion and you might call my arguments bullshit and say that the gold leaguers just have to get good, or that this is all a sham and a conspiracy and that the mapmakers have all been duped by Big Zerg or whatever into thinking that the convenience of an overlord spot is necessary when it's only there to give the pro zergs an unfair advantage. Mapmakers are desigers of competitve multiplayer levels. We try to make them nice to play on. Losing the Overlord doesn't feel nice. Should we sometimes put more thought into which type of pillar to use? Yeah ofc. Should we just get rid of them all on every map? Fuck no.
Yeah I agree. I kind of made the issue bigger than it is, but I do still think Overlords pillar are problematic. Not game breaking but problematic. Like you said very well there are different types of pylars. I think the ones like Lightshade and Jagannatha are too much and completely unnecessary. It's an advantage that the Zerg does not need anymore. Triton and Deathaura are much more acceptable.
And like the other poster said, some Overlord spots can see not only the wall, but natural geysers, mineral saturation etc, that's way too much. But yeah, I mean it's not the incredibly big balance issue but...it's an unnecessary advantage imo.
Changing topics:
Ramp orientation always requiring to be diagona
What's the reason for this?
Also, did you guys see the game of Parting vs Solar GSL game 1 on Oblivion? Should that disqualify Oblivion for this map contest? Or can it be edited?
Cardinal ramps are much shorter than diagonal ramps which look weird and cause Line of Sight issues (and sometimes can be different to wall-off). So they're generally avoided in important areas of the maps, but it's not an absolute must--people can and do definitely still use them.
As for Oblivion it was made for this contest afaik, but Afreeca reached out directly to the mapmaker slightly over a week before GSL started (which is rather unusual) and got the map off him and put it in GSL.
And no it doesn't result in the map getting disqualified from this map contest--this will just be fixed (in fact has already been fixed except the admin that uploads the maps isn't around so hasn't uploaded the fix yet). No idea how GSL operates with regards to this though.
Ramp orientation always requiring to be diagonal What's the reason for this?
I believe it changes the size of the ramp to smaller and also makes the ramp less visible when left/right and even less when top/down. But really, I think left/right ramps should be allowed.
On July 08 2021 23:36 Callynn wrote: I think this cannot be overstated. Also for new mapmakers, having to abide by all these (hidden) rules makes it a very niche and delicate process to get into, and leaving very little room for real advancements.
This is basicly what I'm trying to point out, how there are so many little rules that basicly restrict how much a mapmaker can imagine wild new maps. I really wish the game to get more and more fun and a bit less "standar" with very thight build and timings. That's my point of view, that is probably not shared with everyone, but that is fine. A bit of both is totally fine, wild maps and standar maps together.
Imagine all Best of Series must have the ace match played on a "wild map" (non-standard). That would make for some very interesting series
I have to say that Scavenger is on a different quality level from the others, it's the only one I really hope I get to play on ladder.
Aqueducts is also well done.
Jacaranda is fine, even if 4 spawning point... nor really sure it my cup of thea
The rest, I went through and exclusion process and I am not sure they are any better than what we already have. Treadmill, I am not sure what the purpose of the fast lane is, doesn't really achieve much, plus the units tend to stick to the borders so the effect is lessen a bit.
I played all of them and I am a bit disappointed by the texture quality, Enchanted Isle seems a 10 years old map.
More deserving maps have been left out of the selection I think, for instance, I really enjoyed Seaside Resort, but it's no where to be seen.
It seems I just complain, by I am super happy by all submissions, some of them are truly beautiful, I just wish there was a way to play more of them even if not on ladder, creating custom games is basically playing with friend or AI.
Missed a few games. Cant remember any game on Berlingrad in particular. Where they memorable? What I have seen mostly solidified my opinion. Yamatai just keeps delivering cool games. its my favorite now followed my treadmill and aqueducts. At this point I would also vote for Curious Minds although it feels a bit Terran favored. The Byun Rogue game on Bullwark was amazing to see why spectators might love 4p maps and players hate them. Usually I would advocate for the spectator opinion, because pro-Players not willing to adapt feels just lazy. But this is more a thing for the weird freestyle maps. The fun of the 4p maps is just a short one and then it gets frustrating for everyone. Its really a shame we have only one archetype of Multispawn in the tournament. Fancy middle part of Macro maps still don't do much. Sanguinite sticks out for being best executed not for being special. I feel like repeating myself, but as long as it pushes the thread I'm happy
One small detail that I particularly like on Yamatai is the dynamic of the top-left and bottom-right bases during long games. They are so close and easy to defenend together, that the map is not really split along the symmetry axis. Might be more of an academic point, but I saw it in the Elazer Showtime game.
Was nice to have some discussion about the maps and not just "voted" messages as in some previous threads. I would have liked if some pros had shared their thoughts here also and not only on their streams.
A difficult vote, I like many of the maps, in the end my top 5 is (not ordered): Yamatai, Berlingrad, Jacaranda, Bulwark and Oblivion. But many great maps have been left out as well, which is a shame. I would say that a lot of the maps that didnt make the cut were more interesting than some of these.
I really enjoyed the tournament, and especially liked: Aquaducts Scavenger Berlingrad Treadmill Yamatai Curious Minds Pride of Altaris
And my 4p pick is definitely Jacaranda.
I wish more Agaton's maps could go through, but I'm still quite happy with the finalists.
Not sure if there's gonna be another TLMC anytime soon, but participating was fun. I'm still not sure what went wrong with my other maps, so for the time being I'll reserve myself for making FFA and fun arcade maps and take off my mind of the discussion about judging and imbalance. I appreciate everyone who helped organising TLMC 15!