|
Big news! That's a huge responsibility on the shoulders on TLMC. The lifeblood of the community is in your hands. My two cents is to be very careful with major game changing features because we have patches only once a year, and may not even have reliable patches or map rotations in the future. This is because they can have major impacts on balance that we will be unable to fix (See: ZvP for the past five months).
If I can be frank, two maps with healing shrines plus a 3-player is irresponsible and does a disservice to the SC2 community, who deserve not only fun games, but balanced games. These are game mechanics that are completely untested in SC2's recent history and has have potential balance effects and problems that have yet to be seen. Especially considering we only have three vetoes, I would like to see the amount of maps with healing shrines reduced, perhaps replace one with a "Normal" freestyle map.
I think three freestyle maps is perfect; the sweetspot-but three maps that have untested volatile mechanics is a bit much. I think it would be better to see 1 healing shrine map+1 3p+1 "normal" freestyle.
The Top 3 most-played maps from the previous pool is a great idea. Would love to see Ultra Love in the next map pool again. Magannatha and Tokamak are fantastic maps too.
Cheers.
edit: edited for accuracy
|
Awesome!! TLMC is awesome and I hope TL can coordinate the balance too by testing tons and tons of potential changes with like a 50% community / 50% pro feedback ratio
|
Really a fan of this, good jerbs!
|
MAGANNATHA FANCLUB REJOICE
|
Wow, gogo TL, alive gaem!
Have you considered adding a 4th veto
or have Blizz increase a number somewhere in the config?
Seems to be a popular request.
Players' map preferences are not independent of the race, there are some imbalances affecting some races/matchups more. This can lead to users with same race having similar vetoes.
At the extreme, with 9 map pool and 4 vetoes, race A can have maps #1-4 vetoed, race B can have maps #5-8 vetoed, so only map #9 remains available for a certain A vs B matchup. Similarly with the old 7 map pool with 3 vetoes.
I can see the reason to keep vetoes at 3 max.
Other reason could be 'normal' code with some way hardcoded constants (even if it's configurable, some logic/consideration requires this value to be 3).
|
Well, that's one veto immediately predetermined for Last Fantasy...
It's good to know that map rotations are going to continue though!
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25288 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
i like the 3 returning maps, some good new maps, some diabolical ones i will definitely be vetoing. Lets not get too weird here.
|
sc2 is old enough that we know what we love. the current map pool has some cool ;new; features but these proposed maps some take it too far imo.
|
Bisutopia19237 Posts
This is great news. I love that we can experiment and be more brave with map picks. Thanks for the hard work!
|
Thank god for the end to racism towards 3 player maps
We have to keep in mind survivor's bias is a strong factor - players who liked 3 and 4 players maps are more likely to have left the scene and so their voices are less heard. When you only listen to the current voices, the game becomes more and more narrow and appealing to a smaller and smaller audience
|
|
|
On April 15 2025 11:55 sidasf wrote:
If I can be frank, two maps with healing shrines plus a 3-player is irresponsible and does a disservice to the SC2 community, who deserve not only fun games Sometimes I wonder if you're a bot given the sheer consistency of showing up to every single mapmaking thread to shit talk healing shrines. I'd really rather you'd not be frank. Go actually play on a map with shrines before commenting.
Contrary to picking future maps based on how often they were played in the last pool, there should actually be a rule saying the opposite:
The top 3 most played maps from the last pool should never be allowed to persist into the next successive pool.
Otherwise, you've just picked the most stale maps to make stale a second time.
|
Hi all. Thanks to TLMC for their continued efforts and for considering my finalist for inclusion in the ladder pool.
Considering that fact, I've redecorated Magannatha a bit.
|
Northern Ireland25288 Posts
On April 21 2025 06:42 MrIronGolem27 wrote:Hi all. Thanks to TLMC for their continued efforts and for considering my finalist for inclusion in the ladder pool. Considering that fact, I've redecorated Magannatha a bit.
Nice one, and happy cake day!
|
Northern Ireland25288 Posts
On April 21 2025 00:58 OmniSkepticSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2025 11:55 sidasf wrote:
If I can be frank, two maps with healing shrines plus a 3-player is irresponsible and does a disservice to the SC2 community, who deserve not only fun games Sometimes I wonder if you're a bot given the sheer consistency of showing up to every single mapmaking thread to shit talk healing shrines. I'd really rather you'd not be frank. Go actually play on a map with shrines before commenting. Contrary to picking future maps based on how often they were played in the last pool, there should actually be a rule saying the opposite: The top 3 most played maps from the last pool should never be allowed to persist into the next successive pool. Otherwise, you've just picked the most stale maps to make stale a second time.
There should be more maps in the pools, period.
It’s really hard to accommodate players who like the whacky as well as those who like the safest, most familiar and balanced maps.
Or players who’ve laddered/watched a lot of tournaments and maps become stale to them, alongside players who are much less active and find it beneficial to have at least a few familiar faces.
Not something I’m criticising TLMC about at all, just I’ve long felt the ladder pools should be larger to accommodate divergent desires and leave more room for experimentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
