|
On January 06 2016 02:24 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2015 07:35 CardinalAllin wrote:
trutaCz, I expected this result. Tell me, do you deem this a success or not? I deem it a great success.
Its now been only 6 days and Heartbeat has been played 693 times. It is the 13th most played map on iccup when compared against the number of games played over the entire previous season plus the 6 days.
That’s more than Tau Cross, La Mancha, Longinus, Matchpoint, Andromeda and many more ofcourse.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that by 'forcing' people to play a new map has resulted in more map diversity in the long run?
Perhaps motw should always be just one map every week. But Im getting off topic.
I think if Heartbeat was not liked then people would have stopped using it as motw and instead gone back to just playing their favourite maps.
When iccup introduced 4 new maps including Avalon and Demian, the 4 maps were also motw for the first week. Avalon was played 70 times in the whole season, Demian 97, and if you add the number of games played on all 4 of those new maps together, its 304 games over the whole season.
So Heartbeat has been played more than twice that in 6 days. Ofcourse its more focused having just 1 map than 4 maps at once. But still an impressive reception.
You have to force people to play new maps, or they will not. I value the part of StarCraft that is maps - how they make you figure out solutions to new problems, how they bring out different aspects of players and of races. Therefore, you have to force players to walk the path that is best for the game. If you leave them to their own wills, they will rot in the pool of Fighting Spirit forever. Use maps of the week and small weekly tournaments to make people learn new maps, then use those new maps in bigger, yearly tournaments.
The ICCup /motw maps and the Tours have a good variety of maps going. But unfortunately it doesn't mean people play those maps more (;
|
A week ago in my last post I asked several questions, was hoping for a reply from the tour organisers specifically about:
+ Show Spoiler +Would a tournament organiser care to make a post explaining a bit about the map selection so far? Are foreign maps being considered? Are foreign maps a possibility for the elimination stage?
Could someone tell me why the maps in this thread aren’t being used? I genuinely don’t understand.
btw when I said "or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting."
that was me attempting to be empathetic and to see things from (perhaps) your perspective.
@Draw, I answered your post quite thoroughly and asked a few questions, Id be interested in your reply.
To add something to the thread I will post this:
Currently the map pack is Fighting Spirit, Medusa, Heartbreak Ridge.
What if it was Fighting Spirit, Latin Quarter, Heartbreak Ridge.
Changed 1 map, Medusa for Latin Quarter. Is that better or worse? Its a totally honest question. I want to know if you think that would be better or worse, and Im asking anyone who is reading this thread.
Here are some other combinations that would work nicely in my opinion.
Eddy, Toad Stone, Cross Game.
Latin Quarter, Fighting Spirit, Overwatch.
How about Roadkill, Dantes Peak, Toad Stone.
How about any 1 of the foreign maps plus Dantes Peak game 2 and New Sniper Ridge game 3.
Foreign maps have been used/are being used in all of these foreign tournaments recently/currently:
D Ranks Teamleague
C Ranks Teamleague
Vietnam Starcraft Tournament
Swedish Brood War Initiative Summer Tournament
SBWI Team League
bw.de Hearthstone BetaKey tour
Jade Tour
Nation Wars
Crimson Starleague
German KOTH
And they are all in the iccup map pack.
And yet they arent being used in the biggest foreign tournament, the TLS.
Take 5 minutes and just have another quick look at the pictures of the maps. There must be atleast 1 map that you look at and go, yeah that would be pretty cool to have in the TLS map pack. Lets do it!
+ Show Spoiler +Neo Overwatch ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4HNSDgI.png) The Latin Quarter ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fQmw97J.jpg) Roadkill ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/guQdPER.jpg) Toad Stone ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9ryNyXb.jpg) Eddy ![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4674.jpg) Queensbridge ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/paV62Yk.jpg) Cross Game ![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4580.jpg) Heartbeat ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Fn3ZUCM.jpg)
|
well its pretty clear foreigns maps arent taking in consideration isnt it ? medusa and heartbreak might be no the best choice,but is also pretty clear they dont give a f*ck about players opinions,so why waste time complaining ?(i also dont care what maps we play),but from others players (protoss and terran guys)telling me how hard it is yeah..i kinda feel sorry for them.
|
@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be
Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit.
Earlier in the thread I asked you something, You say you like Ground Zero. Out of curiosity, what did you vote for Toad Stone?
The reason I asked is because they have similar expo layout. I wonder if you would be happy to switch Toad Stone for Neo Ground Zero?
---------------------------
I want to add that I think the organisers do care about player opinion.
eonzerg:...pretty clear they dont {care} about players opinions
My point to the section below in the spoiler isnt primarily about map selection. Im just saying be fair, be truthful.
+ Show Spoiler +I think they do care about player opinion as that is probably why FS got put in. Infact you eonzerg were one of the main people who said you wanted FS in the map pack. As I mentioned before though; In my opinion TLC was successful in not using FS. Overall I would say there were only a few grumbles, while there was also quite a bit of support. eonzerg you were probably the most vocal person who wanted FS put in. It has been put in now. Heres the funny thing though, is this evidence of listening to the players/community or not? I dont claim to know the answer to that but funnily enough my feeling is actually that more people want FS out of the map pack. Also, that 2 old safeish classic korean maps were chosen (medusa+hbr) is probably an attempt to be 'kind' towards the players more than any other group. (though I dont personally think they are the best choice out of the korean maps from a players point of view). But again this fact shows to me that they do care about player opinion. So be fair.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49484 Posts
of all these maps, cross game seems like a lot of fun, not a big fan of LoS blockers but I wonder what everyone thinks of the map, does it have a thread on TL?
actually anyone got reps of the map, I know it was used for one week in nation wars and caught a couple of games through that.
|
On January 13 2016 00:00 CardinalAllin wrote:@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit. Earlier in the thread I asked you something, Show nested quote +You say you like Ground Zero. Out of curiosity, what did you vote for Toad Stone? The reason I asked is because they have similar expo layout. I wonder if you would be happy to switch Toad Stone for Neo Ground Zero? --------------------------- I want to add that I think the organisers do care about player opinion. My point to the section below in the spoiler isnt primarily about map selection. Im just saying be fair, be truthful. + Show Spoiler +I think they do care about player opinion as that is probably why FS got put in. Infact you eonzerg were one of the main people who said you wanted FS in the map pack. As I mentioned before though; In my opinion TLC was successful in not using FS. Overall I would say there were only a few grumbles, while there was also quite a bit of support. eonzerg you were probably the most vocal person who wanted FS put in. It has been put in now. Heres the funny thing though, is this evidence of listening to the players/community or not? I dont claim to know the answer to that but funnily enough my feeling is actually that more people want FS out of the map pack. Also, that 2 old safeish classic korean maps were chosen (medusa+hbr) is probably an attempt to be 'kind' towards the players more than any other group. (though I dont personally think they are the best choice out of the korean maps from a players point of view). But again this fact shows to me that they do care about player opinion. So be fair.
the best way i can answer your question is with another question.do u play broodwar ? you play your maps ? play 3 games in groundzero and play 3 in toadstone and tell me what do u feel. btw i will asume u dont since you are asking this question what leave me with the simple conclusion that u have no idea of what you are talking about.btw in most of foreigners maps i find mineral lines very frustrating,they usually dont work well,drones ignore minerals patch and u need to do it manual all the time.
|
well its pretty clear foreigns maps arent taking in consideration isnt it ? medusa and heartbreak might be no the best choice,but is also pretty clear they dont give a f*ck about players opinions,so why waste time complaining ?(i also dont care what maps we play),but from others players (protoss and terran guys)telling me how hard it is yeah..i kinda feel sorry for them.
After I read this post I got the impression we are on the same side. The only thing is I thought the post was unnecessarily aggressive towards the tour organisers and I said so.
the best way i can answer your question is with another question.do u play broodwar ? you play your maps ? play 3 games in groundzero and play 3 in toadstone and tell me what do u feel. btw i will asume u dont since you are asking this question what leave me with the simple conclusion that u have no idea of what you are talking about.btw in most of foreigners maps i find mineral lines very frustrating,they usually dont work well,drones ignore minerals patch and u need to do it manual all the time.
I don’t understand your choice of tone. You respond by getting aggressive with me now aswell. Simple conclusions are for simple minds. You aren’t stupid so please don’t act it.
But anyway, you are saying there is a pathing problem on Toad Stone. Great, that is some really useful feedback. And you say there are mining problems on some foreign maps. More details about both of these would be welcome. Which areas specifically? What units? A picture or replay would be really helpful for the pathing. (perhaps in the relevant maps own thread).
Doesn’t change the fact that these maps are tournament ready. Toad Stone has been play tested for months by many high level players. That said, if we can improve the maps then we will. We take every feedback seriously and do our best to improve the maps. It’s a collaborative process. Mapmakers need players to expose bugs that can then be ironed out. Maps need to be used in tournaments to get rigorously tested.
Together we have caught and squashed many bugs already through play testing so thankyou again to all the players that have helped me with that.
+ Show Spoiler +Its also fair to say that some people are putting Korean maps on a pedestal unfairly. Neo Ground Zero is a map that I quite like. That should be apparent from my first 1v1 map Checkpoint: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/brood-war/381044-map-2-checkpoint-1v1However, its clear that Ground Zero was a bit of a rush job when you take into account the calibre of the authors previous maps. Also, Jade was played for a long time and tested by many players. Then Neo Jade came out and yet it still had a big problem. The mining at one of the mains was bad enough that Freakling actually did a hotfix for the iccup map pack.
@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be
Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit.
A simple conclusion: We are committed to giving you guys zero reasons not to use these maps.
|
it wasnt my intention to be agresive or anything,but it was a serious question,so i wanted you to take it seriously,
and i have mad respect for organizers ,specially for 2pac that is a fantastic guy,but yeah he has bad taste with the maps :D
|
I understand that you have your agenda as a mapmaker to make and push new maps for people to play in, but is there really a need for you to push your maps so aggressively for others?
BW is a old game played with many old players. Many of these old players simply just want login into iccup/fish/VS/whatever, play with the maps they are familiar with, have fun. A lot of them don't have the luxury of much time to sit down and test all sorts of funky new maps.
Do you think they want to waste time playing a new map, winning/losing because of some perceived map imbalance then going onto the usual forums to whine/cry about it? when they can just start up FS/python/hunters and play for fun, they are familiar with these maps, knowing that these maps have already been proven to be statistically "balanced" and "endorsed" by amateurs and top players alike. (whether thats actually true or not doesn't matter, in their eyes its balanced and that makes them comfortable when playing)
Yes new maps are needed for the longevity and continued evolution of the game, but its not like theres much long term prospects for BW anyway. BW is not as big as it once was and korean tourneys are reluctant to introduce new maps, they don't want some random new map with potentially perceived imbalances to ruin games when they can just opt for the "safe" old options that will guarantee decent games and viewership (despite the fact that those old maps have their own flaws too, but familarity/nostalgia). KSL2 discontinuing usage of new maps is an example of that.
Not to mention in a scene with quite a bit of history like BW, theres probably politics/favoritism involved, where OGN/kongdoo/whoever would rather trust old veteran mapmakers like rose of dream and their maps rather than some up and comer mapmaker, even if that up and comer has some exceptionally made maps.
funny how you mention you create maps for terran to do well in during tournaments, despite the fact that terran is probably the race that have to spend the most amount of preparatory time and effort for new maps in tournaments. unless the map is terran biased you will just make it harder for any terran to win by adding more new maps, especially when foreign terrans (obv not Scan) struggle enough as it is with the usual old maps. but who cares about terran in foreign scene amirite, only zergs ftw
|
The map selection for the prelims makes a lot of sense to me, meaning it wouldn't really make sense to use a foreign map in the prelims. Many players are just trying to get back into shape in the week before and throughout the prelims, mainly using mass games solely on FS on Fish, some on iccup but still using FS only. They shouldn't be expected to learn a new map(s) on top of getting back into shape just for the prelims.
I also think it would make sense to introduce maybe 1 foreign map per round starting in the round of 32. It could even be the same foreign map from ro32 all the way to finals so that players don't have to learn a new map each week they advance. Or 1 map for ro32 to ro16, then a new map for ro8 onwards, you get the idea. Once players get to the ro32, they will be close enough to their top form from the 7 weeks of prelims and thus don't have to focus on getting their mechanics back. They can focus on preparing for specific maps and specific opponents instead, so 1 map per week that they were previously unfamiliar with would be reasonable at that stage of the tournament.
|
Eonzerg: it wasnt my intention to be agresive or anything,but it was a serious question,so i wanted you to take it seriously,
and i have mad respect for organizers ,specially for 2pac that is a fantastic guy,but yeah he has bad taste with the maps :D
Ah ok then. Ofcourse I take you seriously.
Fearthequeen: The map selection for the prelims makes a lot of sense to me, meaning it wouldn't really make sense to use a foreign map in the prelims. Many players are just trying to get back into shape in the week before and throughout the prelims, mainly using mass games solely on FS on Fish, some on iccup but still using FS only. They shouldn't be expected to learn a new map(s) on top of getting back into shape just for the prelims.
Well that is what the TLC’s were for. And the TLC’s were already using a more eclectic map pool than just FS so I disagree with this argument. The TLS has gone backwards and become more conservative. I don’t know why.
Fearthequeen: I also think it would make sense to introduce maybe 1 foreign map per round starting in the round of 32. It could even be the same foreign map from ro32 all the way to finals so that players don't have to learn a new map each week they advance. Or 1 map for ro32 to ro16, then a new map for ro8 onwards, you get the idea. Once players get to the ro32, they will be close enough to their top form from the 7 weeks of prelims and thus don't have to focus on getting their mechanics back. They can focus on preparing for specific maps and specific opponents instead, so 1 map per week that they were previously unfamiliar with would be reasonable at that stage of the tournament.
Excellent. Introduce 1 foreign map is your suggestion. Thanks for saying it, it makes me feel less militant and less solitary when a sentiment is continued to be shared.
Now a bigger reply to Probemicro
Probemicro: I understand that you have your agenda as a mapmaker to make and push new maps for people to play in, but is there really a need for you to push your maps so aggressively for others?
I consider myself a brood war fan primarily, a brood war expert second, and I also have made some maps so I am a mapmaker but that doesn’t mean I have a predetermined scheme. I have suggested 8 maps, some of which are mine but that’s incidental. My goal is to improve brood war. I much prefer wording it like this. Mappers are part of the community and therefore the maps that we generate are extensions of the community. Many elements make up the beast that is ‘foreign broodwar’. This thread in one such element and they all get tossed together into the machine which eventually spits out a result. So far, the result is zero foreign maps in TLS and radio silence for the last few weeks concerning maps from the tour admins. So perhaps the role that I have slowly adopted over the course of this thread, the message I represent is not needed and not wanted. I carefully selected some maps that I honestly think will ultimately lead to the maximum amount of fun for all involved parties. (yay party).
Lol in an amusing turn of events, now its me who is accused of being aggressive hehe. However I think you mean in the sense of being vocal rather than in the sense of being angry. If so then Id agree I have got ‘louder’ as this thread has progressed and after my parody thread got deleted. But I feel I have consistently been making valid points (and generally they haven’t been refuted, just ignored). I haven’t been saying the same things over and over either. Instead I have been adding arguments as events have transpired.
But yeah I seem to have elected myself for this role and the reason is because I am passionate about it. I want brood war to be the best it can be, and I think these maps can help achieve that.
BW is a old game played with many old players. Many of these old players simply just want login into iccup/fish/VS/whatever, play with the maps they are familiar with, have fun. A lot of them don't have the luxury of much time to sit down and test all sorts of funky new maps.
This is absolutely a valid counter argument. I disagree that any of these maps can be described as ‘funky’ though. And there aren’t ‘all sorts’ either. Ive put forward 8 and while they are different, they aren’t wildly divergent from each other. Also, currently the map pool is 3. That’s not a particularly high number. You also imply that they can only have fun on familiar maps but I think they can have fun on new maps too, potentially more.
There are arguments that can oppose your line too. Some of these have been made already by me and others. I will add this; perhaps ‘many’ of the players would like to log in and play new maps where they can be more creative. (Creative is a word that people use here, I don’t necessarily agree with it).
You mention old players. Did you know that Airforce Ace would get most of their wins at the start of the season when the maps were new? These are the players who are the oldest. They have the most experience. They have the least amount of practice time. They are also the weakest in terms of speed and precision.
Interesting food for thought there do you agree?
Also, you suggest that players who don’t have the luxury of time will lead to them losing more games. Is that necessarily a bad thing? Perhaps a player who has practiced something more should be rewarded, I don’t know the answer but Im just putting the idea forward. I understand what you are getting at though. You are saying the games will be less precise, more scrappy, and therefore less exciting if they end quickly. I agree with that. But at the same time, you can argue that ‘natural talent’ and ‘fundamental strategical knowledge (aka experience)’ has a greater chance of shining through on new maps rather than ‘mechanical robot skill’. Im simplifying down to these basic trope terms out of time constraint, apologies.
Do you think they want to waste time playing a new map, winning/losing because of some perceived map imbalance then going onto the usual forums to whine/cry about it? when they can just start up FS/python/hunters and play for fun, they are familiar with these maps, knowing that these maps have already been proven to be statistically "balanced" and "endorsed" by amateurs and top players alike. (whether thats actually true or not doesn't matter, in their eyes its balanced and that makes them comfortable when playing)
Actually I think veteran players have more class and would willingly accept if they lost a game, and would say its due to their own condition more than map imba.
Don’t know why you brought up hunters when the topic is map balance (and python for that matter).
The opening line of this paragraph includes ‘waste time playing a new map’. You can be sure I dispute that. Even if a map were to be used for 1 tournament, you can learn and re-affirm things from that and therefore it was worth it in my opinion. But ofcourse I think these maps could be used for more than 1 tournament. Indeed they already have been, see the list in an earlier post.
Yes new maps are needed for the longevity and continued evolution of the game, but its not like theres much long term prospects for BW anyway.
Wow. In this last month alone we have had countless announcements of growth for brood war. Heck, in the last 24 hours we have two returning pro players, Hyvaa and M18M streaming bw. We have tasteless and artosis casting vnsl, we have Sun, I could go on.
However, I think its irrelevant whether there are long term prospects anyway (if by that you mean growth in player numbers). We can still choose to play new maps if we want to. What you are saying is, being frozen in time is ok and eventually everyone will stop playing broodwar and then that’s it. Well ok, I probably wont be able to convince you otherwise but it’s a position I am nowhere near ready to adopt.
BW is not as big as it once was and korean tourneys are reluctant to introduce new maps,…
I agree with both of those facts, but don’t see how they apply. This is a foreign tournament. We can choose what maps are used.
…they don't want some random new map with potentially perceived imbalances to ruin games when they can just opt for the "safe" old options that will guarantee decent games and viewership (despite the fact that those old maps have their own flaws too, but familarity/nostalgia). KSL2 discontinuing usage of new maps is an example of that.
You prepend the word ‘random’ to ‘new map’. I get that you are using emotive language (that’s not an insult) and it can be useful as it helps to make a point of view clearer. But Im still going to be a pedant and take issue with it. Ive very carefully hand picked these 8 maps out of, well yeah literally thousands. They are unconditionally not random.
You also bring up games that are ‘ruined’ by new maps. So yeah, I understand the concept, there will be some games that are cut short due to unfamiliarity. The question is do the positives outweigh that? (for you its probably a no, for some its yes). But I want to also say that while playing a game of bw, the whole process of figuring out just how far you can push the limit to progress to the next stage of the game is actually a large part of what makes starcraft exactly what it is. A player may lose a game, but through it they have learnt something new about the map that they take into their next game. The whole development is actually fundamental to starcraft. For a map to ruin a game, that takes something like a person not walling properly. Again, I guess I have to just agree. It is a valid point, but I repeat do the positives outweigh that?
For me a game that is ruined is a PvT on circuit breaker left vs right spawn. I often recall Pure vs Leta when they played and it was an hour long game that ended in a draw (cross spawn). It was amazing. But then in the rematch it was left vs right spawn, and it wasn’t amazing to say the least. That’s an example of a map ruining a good game.
We have minimised the difficulty of transition period on these maps by using building markers and other stuff that I detailed already in the thread, specifically in this post:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/bw-tournaments/490990-tlc-teamliquid-legacy-cup-2015-map-discussion?page=3#50
You mention old safe maps that ‘guarantee decent games and viewership’. That is something I dont necessarily agree with. There might be a point when it becomes detrimental, and people are so bored of watching games on the same maps that they don’t tune in. For some of us, that point has been reached already, for you perhaps not. That’s fine, we have to try and work out when the tipping point is about to be reached. If I were a long term strategist Id think it would be wise to pre-emptively introduce new maps before viewership takes a hit rather than reactively. Clearly, I believe that time is now. I think this is the perfect moment to boost brood war in all aspects to really capitalise on the huge amount of momentum that is bubbling in the cauldron right now.
Not to mention in a scene with quite a bit of history like BW, theres probably politics/favoritism involved, where OGN/kongdoo/whoever would rather trust old veteran mapmakers like rose of dream and their maps rather than some up and comer mapmaker, even if that up and comer has some exceptionally made maps.
Look, we are talking about TLS. Its organised by foreigners. We don’t have to copy the Koreans. I dont understand this point at all. Foreigners are in control of the map selection for this tournament. Now it turns out they also don’t happen to trust old veteran map makers such as Freakling either. But they should, just as much as Korean tour organisers should trust the 'up and comer' (just echoing your words here) Korean mapper LatiAs and use his maps (and the foreign maps!).
You say they would rather trust an old veteran map maker rather than an up and comer who has some exceptionally made maps. Well it is totally easy to call them out as being wrong then. The things that should be judged are the maps.
Here is the nice bonus. A map is just bits and bytes. Other people can freely edit them. A map can be improved. It doesn’t matter where it comes from. Once its out, its in the hands of the community. You can take an up and comer map and have veterans approve it. Map makers are fans of brood war, they want the best for it, they collaborate. They seek feedback.
funny how you mention you create maps for terran to do well in during tournaments, despite the fact that terran is probably the race that have to spend the most amount of preparatory time and effort for new maps in tournaments. unless the map is terran biased you will just make it harder for any terran to win by adding more new maps, especially when foreign terrans (obv not Scan) struggle enough as it is with the usual old maps. but who cares about terran in foreign scene amirite, only zergs ftw
Woah now. I never ever said I create maps for terran to do well in.
I quote myself (it was addressed to the tour organisers)
In the foreign scene, terran is a bit weaker if anything, yet you have chosen 2 slightly harder terran maps which is surprising. Could have chosen a balanced map instead, or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting.
And in my following post I clarified with this
btw when I said "or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting."
that was me attempting to be empathetic and to see things from (perhaps) your perspective.
If they were using maps that were bad for zergs, I would still say it would be better to use balanced maps instead. And if zergs were beating terrans on balanced maps, then fine by me. I wouldnt advocate introducing terran favoured maps.
I agree that new maps are tricky for terran. And so I understand your point that new maps would also hurt terrans. It’s a good argument.
Overall, (taking everything into account) I think its far better to use a map that has unknown balance and is new, than an old map that is confirmed to be imbalanced.
I think if I were a terran player Id be pretty happy on a new map that I think I have a chance on, than going into a game where I know the map well, but feel I have a large disadvantage from the start. It would be a fun and interesting challenge. Whereas playing on a map where its considered imbalanced at top level would be an immediate downer for me, and I might get frustrated if I started losing the game etc. Ofcourse some players will be different in that regard.
I think its fair to say that new maps are tricky for P and Z too. So this makes things fairer sort of. Whereas if you play a map that is more ‘figured out’ then you already can anticipate I dunno, a 2 base terran all in etc. Therefore its easy to hold for P/Z.
But if its on a new map where either race can do a powerful 2 base all in, this makes it fairer because the P or Z doesn’t know perfectly how to hold off that attack either, unlike if they were on hbr. This paragraph is a very undeveloped rushed explanation Im afraid due to time, sorry.
However, as you know I think the 8 maps in the op have good balance already (top/high/mid level take your pick). Certainly good enough for some good games right at this moment.
I said I haven’t been repeating myself in this thread but you sort of ask me too a bit now. So Im just going to quickly say 2 things in 2 paragraphs.
These maps are pretty darn easy to quickly get comfortable on. Its as good as it possibly can be while still being strategically different enough to be interesting and worth changing from in the first place. Terrans (all races) should be able to go out on these maps having only looked at the picture even, and still feel like they have an idea of whats going on. You are able to take you favourite opening that you use on your favourite standard map and apply it immediately to any of these maps and you will be able to get stuck in to the game with a solid chance of winning.
If you lose the game, you almost certainly wont think afterwards, gosh this map is completely ridiculous for my race and I am so angry. No, you will hopefully think something more like, that was pretty fun actually, and Ive got a few ideas of what I might try next time.
And the second thing which is a repetition is the whole short term vs long term. Your point was new maps are hard for terran so don’t introduce new maps. The counter being; (if we accept the premise) in the short term it will be a bit tricky but in the long term the benefits are worth it. Its certainly better than just playing proven imbalanced maps for ever more. I cant think how anyone would prefer that scenario.
So in conclusion to Probemicro: Thankyou very much for taking the time to do a detailed reply to me specifically. You make many excellent arguments that summarise the other side of the coin. Many valid points indeed. Ive tried to show how I think the counters outweigh them.
Reading between the lines, Probemicro you are getting bored of my posts in this thread. I just want to quickly say I originally made this thread because the scan ban topic was diluting the map related comments to such a degree it was very inconvenient to follow the conversation in other threads.
So to everyone; please remember this thread is for map discussion, whether Korean or foreign. Its not just whether you like my suggestions in the op or not. I would love to see some opinions about the current map pool. Do you like the 3 maps? Would you change any of them?
also this new quote system is so ugly and uninformative compared to the old system, maybe Im doing it wrong. I only favour new changes that make things better!
|
"Card: In other words, I said that Medusa and Heartbreak Ridge are notoriously hard for terran."
What? I'm curious what this is based on. I'd say only 1 out of 4 of the matchups, being TvP on HBR, is particularly hard on Terran.
I read most of your response to probemicro. I'd say there's no point discussing changing the 3 maps for the preliminaries at this point. You need continuity with the maps of the prelims to make it fair across all 7 weeks. For example, if Eonzerg plays Flisk on the current 3 maps, then we have 3 new maps in week 4 and he plays Cryoc on those, the results become skewed by the maps (you can argue to what degree). The prelims are essentially one big round robin for seeding and the maps should be held constant to give the most accurate seeding.
I'd say focus on potential map rotations for the ro32 onward.
I saw after I posted that example map pool that 2Pac already said the round of 32 onwards will consist of 5 maps and none of the 3 maps from the preliminaries will be used. So my example map pool wasn't completely relevant. If its going to be 5 maps, then I'd say probably 1 foreign map made out of the 5 is a good ratio.
Personally I'd like to see something like this combination of maps could be used throughout the elimination stage:
Eddy (I pick this ahead of other foreigner maps mostly because of its uniqueness.
Circuit Breaker
Outsider
Mist
Wind and Cloud
|
whoops, delete this please
|
btw I know that Cross Game needs a fix to its pylon wall at the 3 o clock. That can be fixed easily if you want to use the map for TLS. For full disclosure, Im toying with the idea of making the 3rd min only slightly easier to take by making the chokes slightly smaller. That would be in the future though.
@BLinD-RawR Im not sure if there is a thread for Cross Game at the moment. I might make one in a few days or something. I think I said in pm that I dont have reps, possibly others could help with that better.
@fearthequeen, I changed that line now. It was a superfluous paragraph. I was trying to put my original sentence into new words because it seemed they were misunderstood. But the original was good so lets just leave it at that:
Card: you have chosen 2 slightly harder terran maps which is surprising
Next:
fearthequeen: I'd say there's no point discussing changing the 3 maps for the preliminaries at this point. You need continuity with the maps of the prelims to make it fair across all 7 weeks.
Yep ok. I havent looked deeply into the format myself right at this moment, but I take your word for it.
After that, you post a big list of suggestions. Thats pretty cool detail, thanks for being thorough. I believe people being really specific like this is the most helpful feedback.
|
United States1433 Posts
Personally, I never thought much of the new maps but that might be because of bias. I really see a lack of innovation, but then again we're talking maps here. How innovative can a person get? I kind of like the map standard kespa has set (including 9 mineral patches in the main, close natural, etc.), but I feel like something, an intangible, extraneous force has got to give.
|
we need more protoss favoured maps like fastest maps 
|
I can say one thing about maps. If you are a good/top player you will understand how certain maps are broken for other races. And how certain races feel playing them. It's just a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
