Responding to Samro because he put so much effort into his post:
Problem detected: close position rush distances Feature: All spawn distances are different Analysis: The map's design to have one short, one mid and one long distance might not be the best decision. As monk writes he think people were put of by it. When you think about it, the issue is that people want to win games. Hence they veto maps that do not match their gameplan and choose maps were they think they know what to do in a certain situation. What Strangewood does is that you can not count on the map being a macro or an agressive map, this map provides the playground for everything. If monk's analysis is right, then i will refrain from such concepts in the future. Right now the map is used in RSL Season 5 and I hope to see more good games on it. From what I have seen before the close position is not abusable to the extent where if forces a specific playstyle, because of the push you have to expect. Verdict: Players prefer all distances fairly the same (think: Frost). It might not be overly entertaining to watch, because games are rather similar, because you can have the same game plan for each spawn setup pretty much.
I agree with you here mostly. However, I want to clarify my short rush distance statement. Strangewood has 39/42 rush distance on vertical/horizontal spawns, calculated by the center of the nexus to the center of the opposing nexus. The shortest rush distance map in the semi-modern map pool is Cloud Kingdom with 43. However, Strangewood has two other features that make the rush distance seem even shorter. First is the lack of watch towers, which allows the defender to spot for attacks slightly quicker on Cloud. The other feature is that the natural choke, where you would normally wall off is very far from the Nexus/CC. This both shortens the rush distance that units have to travel by about 2 seconds and makes it harder for SCVs to come to repair buildings at the choke. For me, at least, this just feels way too short.
Problem detected: Antiga Feature: a close rush distance around 40-42 seconds Analysis: I have to say I totally disagree with monk. Not only is the Antiga comparison missportraying Strangewood, also it is just wrong in the sense that the actual Antiga problem is not the distance in close position, but the positionally imbalance we experienced there for known reasons. Strangewood unlike Antiga provides positionally balanced thirds (unlike Antiga) and it would be intersting to see games on close distance hat actually play out aggressively. Verdict: Bad comparison, I think that portrays the map really really bad.
You're right. Antiga has different problems from Strangewood. It's just that Strangewood has rush distances of 39-42 and Antiga close spawns was the only map that I could think of off the top of my head that's close to that distance.
Problem detected: just "a fix" instead of a natural feature Feature: Author reacted to judges inquiry, added rocks, changes terrain and later took the rocks out again. Analysis: I feel a bit bad about this. Being allowed to react on very short notice to give your map a shot you change a map and afterwards you have to read that the back and forth hurt the image you map has build up. Interestingly the set up of rocks added were tested before during the initial design of the map and rocks actually play a big role in the map's deisgn. This is totally not mentioned here, which is a pitty. The map as it was played in TLMC and was up for vote was very streamlined and had a very clear use of rocks. Verdict: Do not change your map in fruitful discussion with the judges during the testing phase that TLMC provides, better just hope you get it through and change your map to add finally something interesting after the map won second place (...)
This is really bad advice and just undermines the work that we put into testing the map. We tried to identify a problem and propose potential solutions. We even agreed that the addition of the rocks wasn't ideal and tried to come up with better solutions together. In relation to your comments about Ravage, I feel the changes made to that map at the end improved it and had the map been submitted with those changes, it would have gotten top 3 anyways.
Problem detected: many voters were turned off Feature: building a map that is different in many details Analysis: Voters did not veto maps, voters picked ONE map that liked the best! So they picked maps that were either on the secure side (ohana2.0) or had a distinctive cool feature. Also they were clearly put off by the dark tilesets as it was at least represented by the overview. Biggest feature why they were put off is the insecurity about if a map is a close spawn or a long spawn map as discussed before. Verdict: See second paragraph in this post.
I pretty much agree with this. The whole voting system would probably have to be completely revamped in order to change this.
I think Sidian is definitely onto something @ the judges not considering some maps because of "imbalance" yet a lot of the ones chosen had obvious giant balance issues that would need major (not minor) restructuring to fix.
I also think flyingbeer / samro are correct w/ their comments on the voting system.
Good discussion to have and I hope some of the flaws w/ the process get improved upon for next time around!
If you disregard all maps that are potentially imbalanced, there would never be any new ideas. If we picked the most obviously balanced map, they would all be super boring standard maps. We don't expect the mappers to be complete experts on balance, especially for new map designs. Thus, we test the maps ourselves within TL Strategy and suggest balance changes. We eventually suggested changes for seven out of the nine maps. Should those first seven maps not have been selected for finalists?
I think it really comes down to how serious the imbalance is. I hate that I keep picking on Keru but since I've been talking about it constantly I'll keep it at. In a game where 1 and 2 base all-ins are very strong, why make an extremely difficult to hold 3rd, that's not only close to your opponent, but also extremely harassable, with a single wide ramp funneling into it? What you just said about Icarus, that's it not the backdoor that's a problem but holding a 3rd is. Sooo, Keru? How is a zerg ever going to hold an all-in on that map? Blink all-in, have the warp prism for the vision, warp/blink up behind the 3rd, pick away. Immortal/Sentry push, forcefield the single wide ramp behind the 3rd and it's basically GG. What about Terran doing their bio-mine push through that area. Good luck surrounding on the ramp. Let's not even mention when the rocks get taken down it takes like 5 seconds (yes exaggerating here but you get the point) to get from 3rd to 3rd. Grabbing a 4th on the map spreads you out extremely thin to the point that I believe it's basically impossible. (especially combined with the super risky 3rd and the aggressive middle when the rocks are down) There also isn't a 5th. Let's be honest here, the base right next to the main will never get taken. I'll even go out on a limb here and say that in every single game played on Keru I doubt anyone has ever taken that base besides maybe a secret/hidden base.
These are a lot of serious problems on the map and it's just crazy to me that it got rated so highly. So to me, it feels like it either A) Ragoo has a raging hard on for Mereel and does nothing but praise him 24/7 so of course his map will get more exposure to judges or B) Low ground main, neat feature, insta-attention.
I would like to know your opinion, either here or in a PM what all the cool unique features are about Keru that makes you judge it so highly, when you look at all imbalanced possibilities it has.
You then have the maps like Yeonsu where the biggest problem would be surface area of the main making reapers/blink too strong, which would be a simple easy fix that wouldn't have to completely remake the entire map, unlike what would have to change on Keru to make it better, or Koprulu.
Lastly, I'd like to say something regarding this:
If we picked the most obviously balanced map, they would all be super boring standard maps.
Yet probably the most balanced super boring standard maps won the Pro and the Public vote. In my opinion most viewers probably don't care if a map doesn't have super gimmicky cool features in it, they just don't want to see the same map pool for years straight. Sure Ravage is very standard and basically Ohana with an extra base, but it's still got a fresh feeling to it because that's just it, it's new. Everybody praised Pro league for trying out all these wacky as shit maps in Proleague, yet after one round most of the wacky maps get phased out and/or rebalanced because let's face it, they suck. All these leagues are choosing standard maps because they are the most enjoyable to watch. As long as we get Ravage 2.0 in 3 months, then Ravage 3.0 a couple months after that, viewers will enjoy it. They start to get fed up when it's Ravage for 2 years.
So yeah, maybe it's cool to see mineral walls or a low ground main, but let's be honest here, I'd veto that in a heartbeat because playing with such a gimmicky feature isn't enjoyable and watching pros play with that gimmicky feature gets really old, really fast.
Again, just a difference of opinion. First of all, most of the features I liked about Keru can be found included here.
I actually don't think two base all-ins would have been a huge problem on Keru for various reasons. However, in my initial judgement of the map, I actually pegged three base all-ins to be a much bigger deal and I made a note that the third bases might need to be further apart. I also thought the fourths might be too far as well. In our inhouse TL Strategy testing, these and some other potential issues were brought up, but no one thought the map was unplayable at all or required major changes. Furthermore, the only TLOpen game I watched on Keru featured the entire map being taken.
If you count Plexa (whose opinion didn't count in the final tally) four of the five judges who looked at all the maps independently picked Keru as a top six map. We also all judged based on our own personal interpretation of the rules listed in the TLMC#2 announcement and there was no agreed upon rubric or anything. In addition, it was one of the more popular maps in the TLMC threads, in chats with various mappers, and in chats with testers and players.
Honestly, if you gave Electric Circuit instead as your example of an imbalanced map, I would tend to agree with that more. There were flaws in the original version of the map that I didn't notice or look closely enough at. It turned out to be a bitch to fix, and I don't think the end result was actually very balanced.
I just went and looked at the original version of Strangewood Mire from the original TLMC 2 thread. I didn't like that map for a long time was because I thought the third was too safe because of the rocks. I had thought that was the original version of the map because that's what was displayed when the winners were announced. But you're saying the judges are the ones who talked you into putting those there? Wow! The judges don't understand balance....
To suggest that the judges (which included two progamers) didn't understand balance is just silly and frankly a bit insulting. Also, I think there's been some confusion on this. I don't recall suggesting any changes that would make thirds easier to take and I'm pretty sure he's talking about different sets of rocks. I thought the thirds on the original map were too easy, if anything.
Well, let's face it, the stakes of balance are even higher for progamers. IdrA >>>>> everyone in this topic in terms of playing skill but I don't think anyone takes anything he says about balance seriously.
Apart from that, to talk about the quality of maps from a subjective point of view which I so seldom do. I'm going to be honest. I don't see what makes these maps better. In fact, I think CK is still better. Sure it's old and we all grew tired of it, but it's still better if we take out the datetness. In fact, it has been out of the pool for such time now, people can re-introduce it instead of these maps for all I care.
And I mean, define better? What is better, in my opinion a good map leads a certain type of play and is balanced of course, the play I want to see is:
- a map which rewards early aggression and punishes people sitting on their loins - a map which forces and rewards players for properly splitting their army up, putting your army in one place should cause you your third - a map which makes harassment rewarding, typically involving lots of airspace to park mutas and medivacs in
Do I think any of the finalists especially offer that? No, not really honestly. I don't think they're any significant improvement. Am I remotely impressed with Frost? No, not really, I don't even think it dose the same thing better, CK did the same thing better. But I don't think Frost is at any place going to lead to more interesting games.
But hey, what do I know, I thought Antiga was a good map because it gave us action packed nailbiting games more often than not, but I guess it's bad because FFE is hard on it, I keep forgetting to consider that.
I just went and looked at the original version of Strangewood Mire from the original TLMC 2 thread. I didn't like that map for a long time was because I thought the third was too safe because of the rocks. I had thought that was the original version of the map because that's what was displayed when the winners were announced. But you're saying the judges are the ones who talked you into putting those there? Wow! The judges don't understand balance....
To suggest that the judges (which included two progamers) didn't understand balance is just silly and frankly a bit insulting. Also, I think there's been some confusion on this. I don't recall suggesting any changes that would make thirds easier to take and I'm pretty sure he's talking about different sets of rocks. I thought the thirds on the original map were too easy, if anything.
Well, let's face it, the stakes of balance are even higher for progamers. IdrA >>>>> everyone in this topic in terms of playing skill but I don't think anyone takes anything he says about balance seriously.
Fine, forget that they're progamers. Just take into account that they're Morrow and TLO. I have some fairly solid credentials as well.
On June 23 2013 14:58 SiskosGoatee wrote: But hey, what do I know, I thought Antiga was a good map because it gave us action packed nailbiting games more often than not, but I guess it's bad because FFE is hard on it, I keep forgetting to consider that.
Pretty sure this is a bait or something, but the reason people didn't like Antiga had nothing to do with FFE.
I just went and looked at the original version of Strangewood Mire from the original TLMC 2 thread. I didn't like that map for a long time was because I thought the third was too safe because of the rocks. I had thought that was the original version of the map because that's what was displayed when the winners were announced. But you're saying the judges are the ones who talked you into putting those there? Wow! The judges don't understand balance....
To suggest that the judges (which included two progamers) didn't understand balance is just silly and frankly a bit insulting. Also, I think there's been some confusion on this. I don't recall suggesting any changes that would make thirds easier to take and I'm pretty sure he's talking about different sets of rocks. I thought the thirds on the original map were too easy, if anything.
Well, let's face it, the stakes of balance are even higher for progamers. IdrA >>>>> everyone in this topic in terms of playing skill but I don't think anyone takes anything he says about balance seriously.
Fine, forget that they're progamers. Just take into account that they're Morrow and TLO. I have some fairly solid credentials as well.
Knowledge does not amount of lack of bias. DK and DB constantly have gone on record lamenting that the advice of progamers is nigh on useless. Every progamer argues in favour of their own race getting buffs and the other race getting nerfs. Now, TLO seems very fair but Morrow has let out some pretty sour balance whining comments at some points.
In terms of evaluating balance lack of bias is more important than knowledge. A bronze league player free of bias gives a more accurate description of balance than IdrA in the heat of passion after having just lost a ZvT.
Pretty sure this is a bait or something, but the reason people didn't like Antiga had nothing to do with FFE.
One of the things that was mentioned. I could've cited the foruth base issue but that'd make it less snide and sarcastic.
On June 23 2013 11:11 NewSunshine wrote: If standard to you is still what you see on Shakuras Plateau, I'm soundly convinced that you're still out of touch with maps, in a disturbingly comprehensive way. I guess that's why it's surprising to me that you still act like you know everything, when I've seen nothing to indicate it. You like to talk shit about how we don't know what we're doing, and how you somehow know something none of us do, but I've seen absolutely nothing substantial to back it up. You've just recently made your second map, after spending 3 years sitting on your first. You are the equivalent of a player who got Diamond at the start of WoL, then proceeded to not play, and talks shit about everyone playing the game at a sub-GM level ever since. Where's the action, where's the experience and the effort?
I'd be nice if you stopped spreading lies about me, NewSunshine. I've already corrected Timetwister22 on the other thread when he tried to attack me by saying I only made one map. The latest one is actually the 5th I publish, and I've also reskinned/relit 7 other maps. All of them were posted on TL, so use the search function when you don't read replies. Personal attacks are one things but calumny is a different thing. Mods have let those attacks slip twice but I'm not.
On June 23 2013 11:11 NewSunshine wrote: If standard to you is still what you see on Shakuras Plateau, I'm soundly convinced that you're still out of touch with maps, in a disturbingly comprehensive way. I guess that's why it's surprising to me that you still act like you know everything, when I've seen nothing to indicate it. You like to talk shit about how we don't know what we're doing, and how you somehow know something none of us do, but I've seen absolutely nothing substantial to back it up. You've just recently made your second map, after spending 3 years sitting on your first. You are the equivalent of a player who got Diamond at the start of WoL, then proceeded to not play, and talks shit about everyone playing the game at a sub-GM level ever since. Where's the action, where's the experience and the effort?
I'd be nice if you stopped spreading lies about me, NewSunshine. I've already corrected Timetwister22 on the other thread when he tried to attack me by saying I only made one map. The latest one is actually the 5th I publish, and I've also reskinned/relit 7 other maps. All of them were posted on TL, so use the search function when you don't read replies. Personal attacks are one things but calumny is a different thing. Mods have let those attacks slip twice but I'm not.
NewSunshine has a very good point about you chucky. You act like you know more than everyon, and you really have nothing to back that up...at all. You have made one map. I have used the search function. Here's what comes up: + Show Spoiler +
So yeah, you have made one map from scratch. Everything else I have seen from you are reskins, an april fools joke, and a blizzard remake. Where are these other 4 maps you say that you have made from scratch and published on TL? You're either lying about the amount of maps you have truly made from scratch, or you're not following the Custom Maps forum guidelines by putting [M] in your melee map thread title. If you have other maps, share them. Then people might actually take you seriously.
On June 23 2013 16:37 Arceus wrote: hows about TLMC3 is 3-player map ONLY. Im dying to see some
Why?
There's a couple of things wrong with them:
- 3 always positionally imbalanced in every spawn. - Even spawn imbalanced, the game works in a square grid, not a triangle or hex grid, you can't even copy spawns perfectly.
I think mirror symmetry 4p maps with 1 spawn disabled is a great way to do a "3p" map without any positional imbalance. It also gets rid of the annoying RNG of possibly scouting someone dead last on a 4p map and the negative ramifications that can have, especially in certain matchups. Only 2 places to scout isn't nearly as bad.
Plus you can make the map a lot more interesting than if you force yourself to have all spawns enabled, due to rush distances having to be a certain length if it's all spawns. You end up having similar terrain features as previous all-spawn maps.
That said, I think 3p maps made the ol' fashioned way are doable and can (probably) be balanced with enough tinkering/thought put into them. Although we haven't seen a great 3p map in SC2 yet (sorry testbug :-P), so.. let's see what the future brings
On June 24 2013 13:00 Fatam wrote: I think mirror symmetry 4p maps with 1 spawn disabled is a great way to do a "3p" map without any positional imbalance. It also gets rid of the annoying RNG of possibly scouting someone dead last on a 4p map and the negative ramifications that can have, especially in certain matchups. Only 2 places to scout isn't nearly as bad.
pretty much, also, most of such maps have an optimal scouting route. Like say metal, you will always first scout close by air, and then cross, so their is no luck involved.
A thing I always thought stupid about rotational symmetry back when TDA was still in the pool was that in PvZ you had to scout twice to be safe against a 7pool. If you scouted Z last there was no way to defend, the lings would be in your base before your probe arrived in his if he sent them the right way. Why? Because even though the scouting path for you was the longest, the rush distance for him was the shortest. On metalopolis with close disabled. If it took your scouting probe longer to travel because it was cross, then so the lings, so it evened out.
Thank you for the write up monk. I'm a novice map maker myself (just do it in my spare time when I'm not laddering) and looking at the "things to judge list" has given me a much bigger picture to focus on when creating a map.
Hopefully Frost can make it into the ladder next season, it is by far one of my most favorite maps.
On June 23 2013 11:11 NewSunshine wrote: If standard to you is still what you see on Shakuras Plateau, I'm soundly convinced that you're still out of touch with maps, in a disturbingly comprehensive way. I guess that's why it's surprising to me that you still act like you know everything, when I've seen nothing to indicate it. You like to talk shit about how we don't know what we're doing, and how you somehow know something none of us do, but I've seen absolutely nothing substantial to back it up. You've just recently made your second map, after spending 3 years sitting on your first. You are the equivalent of a player who got Diamond at the start of WoL, then proceeded to not play, and talks shit about everyone playing the game at a sub-GM level ever since. Where's the action, where's the experience and the effort?
I'd be nice if you stopped spreading lies about me, NewSunshine. I've already corrected Timetwister22 on the other thread when he tried to attack me by saying I only made one map. The latest one is actually the 5th I publish, and I've also reskinned/relit 7 other maps. All of them were posted on TL, so use the search function when you don't read replies. Personal attacks are one things but calumny is a different thing. Mods have let those attacks slip twice but I'm not.
NewSunshine has a very good point about you chucky. You act like you know more than everyon, and you really have nothing to back that up...at all. You have made one map. I have used the search function. Here's what comes up: + Show Spoiler +
So yeah, you have made one map from scratch. Everything else I have seen from you are reskins, an april fools joke, and a blizzard remake. Where are these other 4 maps you say that you have made from scratch and published on TL? You're either lying about the amount of maps you have truly made from scratch, or you're not following the Custom Maps forum guidelines by putting [M] in your melee map thread title. If you have other maps, share them. Then people might actually take you seriously.
It's the 3rd time you and your ESV teammate spread lies about me on this forum and this is not acceptable. Each time I've posted proofs about the work I've done and you keep coming back lying and denigrating me. Not only is this calumny but it's also close to being harassment.
Here's the list of the maps I've made public on TL. You've mentioned 3 of these maps here and in another thread last month, and you've even posted in some of those map threads back then so you can't claim you'd never heard of them. I don't know how you're able to get away with the claim I've only made one map that took 1 hour to make. Here's the list as requested :
Back to Back, Join2 Kulas, Bounty Beach Winter, Congo which was made before the mapping subforum was created, and Sidekicks, which I made along with Johanaz and that he's modified the night before publishing it, adding two islands without telling me amongst other things. Here are the 7 reskins of tournament maps I've also done.
For your 2nd teammate that attacked me, here's a texturing tutorial I've made and one about lighting. I may have done one more indepth but basically if you do a proper 3-point lighting with these settings you've done the job. I've also organized a handful of tournaments with other maps than mines and got famous players and casters. So stop insinuating I haven't done anything for the community and that I don't know about texturing/lighting either.
So Timetwister, maybe someday people might start taking me seriously but not before you stop harrassing me in threads I post in, posting what you know are lies and asking for people to not listen to me. But if you want to keep denigrating me you should make a new thread because none of what you're posting has anything to do with the topic.
On June 24 2013 13:27 Hellbat wrote: Thank you for the write up monk. I'm a novice map maker myself (just do it in my spare time when I'm not laddering) and looking at the "things to judge list" has given me a much bigger picture to focus on when creating a map.
Hopefully Frost can make it into the ladder next season, it is by far one of my most favorite maps.
Appreciate the write-up monk, well done. Even though it is very clear now that map makers hold very strong beliefs about maps, it's still always nice (for me at least) to read what non-mappers think.
I apologize in advance for the sidetrack this post causes/enables, for the sake of the thread I intend this to be my last on the subject.
It's the 3rd time you and your ESV teammate spread lies about me on this forum and this is not acceptable. Each time I've posted proofs about the work I've done and you keep coming back lying and denigrating me. Not only is this calumny but it's also close to being harassment.
For the sake of fairness I'll go through things with you.
and Sidekicks, which I made along with Johanaz and that he's modified the night before publishing it, adding two islands without telling me amongst other things.
3 if you count Sidekicks. I'm not sure why you would though, since Johannaz clearly did several things to the map that you didn't like.
. Here are the 7 reskins of tournament maps I've also done.
Reskinning can be cool, but the result isn't a map you actually created. Also, it's not very difficult to reskin a map. I don't get why you're making such a big deal about it every time it gets brought up.
So stop insinuating I haven't done anything for the community and that I don't know about texturing/lighting either.
I never said anything of the sort. What I am insinuating, is that you seem to have an arrogance about you that is completely unfounded. You assume every mapmaker in the world, aside yourself, is just too lazy to change the lighting on their maps, when you're not involved with the community enough to know either way. I debunk this, and suddenly I'm saying you know nothing, and contribute even less? Please.
As for being taken seriously, you've made 4 original maps. 4. 5 includes Sidekicks, 12 includes the reskins. Ignoring the fact that 2 of those original 4 are completely unsuitable for any form of competitive play, the number of maps you've made is miniscule at best. Over the course of SC2 I've made approximately 500 maps, most of them don't make it, the number is there purely to demonstrate the effort I've put into this as a hobby. Search [M] under any established mapper's name and you'll probably find quite a few. My point is, you can't be so arrogant about a craft with which you don't actually have that much experience. You may have been around since the beginning, but if time were the only deciding factor then Timetwister and Semmo would still be busy making bad maps right now. Timetwister's become part of ESV, Semmo's won TLMC. It's effort, it's drive, but most importantly, it's a love for the craft. Humility is also extremely important.
On June 23 2013 11:11 NewSunshine wrote: If standard to you is still what you see on Shakuras Plateau, I'm soundly convinced that you're still out of touch with maps, in a disturbingly comprehensive way. I guess that's why it's surprising to me that you still act like you know everything, when I've seen nothing to indicate it. You like to talk shit about how we don't know what we're doing, and how you somehow know something none of us do, but I've seen absolutely nothing substantial to back it up. You've just recently made your second map, after spending 3 years sitting on your first. You are the equivalent of a player who got Diamond at the start of WoL, then proceeded to not play, and talks shit about everyone playing the game at a sub-GM level ever since. Where's the action, where's the experience and the effort?
I'd be nice if you stopped spreading lies about me, NewSunshine. I've already corrected Timetwister22 on the other thread when he tried to attack me by saying I only made one map. The latest one is actually the 5th I publish, and I've also reskinned/relit 7 other maps. All of them were posted on TL, so use the search function when you don't read replies. Personal attacks are one things but calumny is a different thing. Mods have let those attacks slip twice but I'm not.
NewSunshine has a very good point about you chucky. You act like you know more than everyon, and you really have nothing to back that up...at all. You have made one map. I have used the search function. Here's what comes up: + Show Spoiler +
So yeah, you have made one map from scratch. Everything else I have seen from you are reskins, an april fools joke, and a blizzard remake. Where are these other 4 maps you say that you have made from scratch and published on TL? You're either lying about the amount of maps you have truly made from scratch, or you're not following the Custom Maps forum guidelines by putting [M] in your melee map thread title. If you have other maps, share them. Then people might actually take you seriously.
It's the 3rd time you and your ESV teammate spread lies about me on this forum and this is not acceptable. Each time I've posted proofs about the work I've done and you keep coming back lying and denigrating me. Not only is this calumny but it's also close to being harassment.
Here's the list of the maps I've made public on TL. You've mentioned 3 of these maps here and in another thread last month, and you've even posted in some of those map threads back then so you can't claim you'd never heard of them. I don't know how you're able to get away with the claim I've only made one map that took 1 hour to make. Here's the list as requested :
Back to Back, Join2 Kulas, Bounty Beach Winter, Congo which was made before the mapping subforum was created, and Sidekicks, which I made along with Johanaz and that he's modified the night before publishing it, adding two islands without telling me amongst other things. Here are the 7 reskins of tournament maps I've also done.
For your 2nd teammate that attacked me, here's a texturing tutorial I've made and one about lighting. I may have done one more indepth but basically if you do a proper 3-point lighting with these settings you've done the job. I've also organized a handful of tournaments with other maps than mines and got famous players and casters. So stop insinuating I haven't done anything for the community and that I don't know about texturing/lighting either.
So Timetwister, maybe someday people might start taking me seriously but not before you stop harrassing me in threads I post in, posting what you know are lies and asking for people to not listen to me. But if you want to keep denigrating me you should make a new thread because none of what you're posting has anything to do with the topic.
Chucky,
If you want to be taken seriously by the community than you must be willing to demonstrate an understanding of the basic concepts utilized by your peers as well as willingly accept criticism of your work and if choosing not to explore the changes made during critique phases you must explain why. This is common practice in all industries requiring content creation, especially the video game industry. I will not argue your contribution to the creation of a baseline for texturing -- but I will argue the point that you should be treated as an expert peer to other map makers such as Timetwister. Your work has not demonstrated a similar level of quality and analytical thought process.
The reason I agree with Timetwister and NewSunshine that your work is lacking in quantity first is that re-skins and re-lights do not change the terrain or terrain mechanics, thereby making the work purely aesthetical. It demonstrates zero regard towards the mechanics and strategies employed commonly in the game. Assuming I would accept the re-skins/re-lights, I would not accept them as being the quality of an expert in aesthetic work due to subpar work in that regard.
I cannot accept the Kulas Ravine re-make as a separate map because it is merely modification of a pre-existing map/concept. I think any of the mapmakers who did modify the Blizzard maps for the Better than Blizzard contest would agree that their maps should not be considered separate works nor added to their portfolios either. I cannot accept Bounty Beach because it does not demonstrate an understanding of more complex theories and ideas surrounding pathing, line of sight, and unit composition. It does demonstrate limited insight into height advantage and some simple understanding of data editing. As for Congo and Back 2 Back, both maps were created over 2 years ago originally, and Back 2 Back only saw a recent update due to the good nature of a high level mapmaker to try and help you to become more accepted. However, as you have rebuffed the changes made multiple times--stating they were made last minute and without your approval--I cannot even accept the updated version as being your work. Due to the extended period of time from when the maps were created, I cannot even consider you a map maker with up to date knowledge of the game, let alone an ability to produce quality or a quantity of maps.
For the tournaments you have helped organize and operate, I thank you. That demonstrates knowledge in organization -- it does not however demonstrate knowledge to the topic at hand (maps). Having helped organize and run tournaments myself as well as provided material support to the development of map pools to tournament organizations, I am confident in saying that good organizers recognize their own disadvantage in ability to analyze and incorporate not only a single map, but a map pool in total and thus rely on sub-managers they hire and consider expert in their respective game (i.e. Starcraft II) to assist in the production of a good play environment (maps included).
Until such time as you demonstrate requisite knowledge and potential (requiring a completely new map), I and many others cannot accept your opinion as valid regardless of arguable position. If you would like help working on a new map, I am certain you would receive it and mentoring and being a mentee is the only way we further our knowledge collectively and individually. You are creative, and you do have interesting ideas -- I encourage you to pick up the mantle and create a new map, critique that map and discuss outside criticism making improvements where you can/should.
End of de-rail
As for the thread itself Monk -- there are definitely some spots I disagree with you about but they have already been addressed. It is a good write-up and will be very useful for any future competitions. Grats!
Years pass and things stay the same .. seats change as in a game .. but really nothing really changes .. sigh*
"Thoughts on Mapping and TLMC #2" .. my feeling is that it is really disconcerting to see how ambivalent mapmakers can be... They seem invested and this to a ninth degree that seems excessive to get things to change.
But then again, when you are in the driving seat .. who wants to hear about "turns" (to drive).
A mapmaker .. a player .. a complete ignorant discovering this forum (or any other map forum indeed) .. everyone should be "motivated" to post and never attacked .. mocked .. discouraged .. etc
Am I the only sad panda seeing all this ?
Edit : f k I typed "send" instead of finishing my thought...
There is NO gain in combat outside the ladder.. map makers are diplomats and engineers .. not specifically people you would want to put a good show in endlessly spitting on each other ...
Trust me, I know about this particular issue .. nothing comes out of it .. ever
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jZhRIFu.png)
