EPTSo first of all… the TLMC event just ended. And we went through an iteration process using feedback. So just a little more… and we have a set of maps for the upcoming map pool. It’s rare nowadays to have a full rotation (specifically built up to not be affected by such a thing). Oh, well. No one notified us about major changes and decisions that had been made (silently). And because of that, I find this patch is selfish and self-serving.
My first concern is that the current changes could lead us into chaos. And knowing how difficult it is to change something, we will remain with this until the end of the year(?). We strive to meet modern demands with designs. But we also rely on the current balance, economy and state of the art in the game. More macro? Ok, no problem. Turtle and choky? Once again no problem, we can create an open and aggressive layout. Feel like you want more freestyle? Dude, we have that. But we rely on the current citation. We are not wizards to predict the future.
This may seem abstract, but the size of the maps and the rush distance involved here won't work with this new approach. First of all, if the game's economy is slowing and this encourages players to spend more time on two or three bases, then why do we need so much variability (or variety)? In my understanding, the value of various features begins to be lost too. Gold base and rich vespene geyser (with only 6) less valuable and interesting. It makes me feel that this will take us back to the very beginning with something simple and straightforward. 10 bases in total and that is it. You have a crappy main base and it is small like your shlong, you have your natural thing 8 or 9 tiles (which is (once again) length of your shlong in cm.), the choke point and entrance, one ramp and two more bases, and a couple debris with sight blockers ahead. Secondly, I seriously think that such changes will encourage players to just go (straightforward once again) and simply attack head-on from the very beginning.
So what should we do then? Increase the rush distance? Because I find this hard to understand. Ovi speed has become slower, but the reapers will be more dangerous. And this means that the variety on how to organize natural and main expansions will be very limited. If Protoss has such changes, how are we supposed to know the best way to organize entrances in and out now? I genuinely can’t see the whole picture on what to do next. I'd like to see some positivity while reading the patch but I can’t.
So the question is… the game will be slower, don’t need more bases… and what to do? stare into space and never touch some parts of the map (because you don't need to)? On the other hand, how much “rush distance do we need now?” to not fall into despair against adepts, lings, reapers. What is the reasonable number here? Because I do believe we have a conundrum here. Small maps with less number of bases, basic layout, but we need to keep rush distance above how much? 34 probably.
My last TLMC submissions were all about demonstrating a new approach to mapmaking. I purposefully (deliberately and consciously) made wide open maps and added lots of bases. My finalist “At Eternity’s Edge” has 17 bases while being diagonal symmetry map design. You know why? It's not because all these bases need to be expanded and fully mined out. And the game needs to be as long as Artosis’s beak and sticky, like your keyboard. Oh, no sir. These bases are necessary because the game is dynamic! If one of your bases is taken from you, go the other way and take something else. Because that's how you start to fight back and survive. We can do this because we have confidence. We have the experience to experiment and move forward. But when we enter uncharted territory… it sets us back. It makes us conservative.
My second concern… team maps. We've just straightened things out. Now we have more than one layout. We have an excellent map pool. Lots of things were done together with Kantu, Mizenhauer and other folks. Queue alone? Wanna play with strangers and meet them behind the Wendy’s? Sure, hit the button, I approve your decision. Wanna play macro? Do you want to build 20 carriers and lose the game, Amor Fati, brother, you can. A lot has been adapted to the current balance and state of art… once again. And especially the distances between ramps and how much space is open.
In my opinion, such changes should be presented in advance and not right at the end of TLMC.
You can’t just do things alone… and bend us over in a love position.
To be more specific and serious…
8 workers could seriously hurt 2v2 team maps. I don't know how it would work on 3v3 or 4v4. But 2v2 would suffer greatly. Players simply won't be able to complete/cover/close the wall, since maps have separate ramps and mains (like Rust Bucket and Rohana), either two or one but wide. I mean, we will see more 9, 10,11,12 pools and reaper rushes more often. In 1v1, my biggest concern is that the map designs will be sparse and primitive. I'm also concerned about the current spacing between bases. I think PvZ will be very difficult. And Terrans will place CC inside the main more often once again. And overall, I see less variety due to blink stalkers. Probably we will never see the Romanticide setup again. And frankly, White Rabbit is going to be on the repeat.
I have spoken.
