I would like to do some polls to see what type of map people are looking for for tournament play. Could also be quite fun to see the different numbers. Feel free to post any additional information you come up with in a post. Also if anybody can think of any other great polls to be added let me know and I'll edit them into this main post.
For the most part the map will either be a 2 player map or a 4 player map. Please vote.
Next, I would like you all to let me know how far away you'd like the distances between Mains. Assuming cross-positions on 4 player maps.
Poll: Distances Between Mains (assuming cross positions in 4player maps)
Bigger then Shakuras. (101)
53%
Equal to Shakuras (55)
29%
Equal to Xel'naga Caverns (19)
10%
Equal to Metalopolis (7)
4%
Smaller then Steppes of War (4)
2%
Equal to Steppes of War (3)
2%
189 total votes
Your vote: Distances Between Mains (assuming cross positions in 4player maps)
(Vote): Bigger then Shakuras. (Vote): Equal to Shakuras (Vote): Equal to Metalopolis (Vote): Equal to Xel'naga Caverns (Vote): Equal to Steppes of War (Vote): Smaller then Steppes of War
How many bases do you prefer to see a player get to?
Poll: How many bases do you prefer to see a player get to?
Five+ (Macro it up!!) (88)
48%
Four (55)
30%
Three (27)
15%
Five (9)
5%
One (All-in baby) (3)
2%
Two (3)
2%
185 total votes
Your vote: How many bases do you prefer to see a player get to?
(Vote): One (All-in baby) (Vote): Two (Vote): Three (Vote): Four (Vote): Five (Vote): Five+ (Macro it up!!)
Would you like there to be a Gold Expansion?
Poll: Would you like there to be a Gold Expansion?
Yes, but one for each player. (90)
53%
No, none at all. (51)
30%
Yes, but just one. (30)
18%
171 total votes
Your vote: Would you like there to be a Gold Expansion?
(Vote): Yes, but just one. (Vote): Yes, but one for each player. (Vote): No, none at all.
As I said, feel free to post any additional thoughts on what your ideal map could be. ex. close air positions? no destructible rocks? no xel'naga towers?
On January 12 2011 06:43 LittLeD wrote: This is quite impossible to say straight up.
What I want is a great variety of maps where the MAJORITY are macro maps. That doesnt mean you should exclude 2-player maps with shorter distances
It's not necessarily saying all maps would be like this. It's more so saying if I'm going to design a sc2 map then I want to design it like this because the majority of people (at least on TL) prefer it this way.
I think there should be a gold for each base. That said, it should be like what iCCup's done with it: mineral only. It thus means that there is an incentive to take gold bases, but it makes them not inherently better than other bases.
I'd say that Iccup Enigma should be considered about ideal size for my ideal map. I should be able to 14 hatch and it wouldnt be possible to scout me before the hatch is about to go down. You'd have maybe 2-3 seconds to block my drone if you scouted straight to my expo on 9 supply. Also, each player should have an obvious 4th, and if the entire map were taken, the game should be >1 hr long. No golds though, favors T (lol j/k). 4th should be blocked by rocks tho, and maybe 3rd blocked by low HP rocks (like 500hp rocks). Nat should be easily defendable, standard opening for all races should be macro oriented, simply because of how rush-unfriendly the map would be. There would be a large defender's advantage both at main ramp, and expo ramp. 3rd should open up a little more, no more than Metal's nat. That would be my ideal map (also, only 1 or 2 xelnaga towers)
Obviously Big macro maps where all-ins dont work 70% of the time. Like most of the people says, nobody wants to watch a 5 min game where X beats Y using just workers/mass Z units.
On January 12 2011 10:24 KezseN wrote: Obviously Big macro maps where all-ins dont work 70% of the time. Like most of the people says, nobody wants to watch a 5 min game where X beats Y using just workers/mass Z units.
EPT
