The wait is over! The possible WCS/ladder maps for next season can be found below. As a reminder, as with TLMC7, we used four categories to split up all the maps. (Macro, Rush, New, Experimental Resource). From the pool of submitted maps, we would choose 3 Macro Maps, 3 Rush Maps, 3 "New" Maps and 3 "Experimental Resource" Maps. In addition, we had three(3) "Judge's Choice" picks, which could come from any category. For this particular contest, we felt that the Macro category was by far the strongest, so this season we will have 6 Macro maps in the map pool.
This season, we also asked mappers to carefully describe their own maps, so you'll be able to hear from the horses' mouths why you should pick their respective maps.
Another thing to note is that there is currently a battle.net bug that prevents players from searching for these maps directly. As such, we will link to each map on each of the three main battle.net servers if you want to check them out.
Again, we will be working with all mappers in the coming two phases (BasetradeTV Tournament Phase and Iteration Phase) to improve the maps before the final voting stage where you, the Starcraft community, will get to pick who wins the cash prizes.
FINALISTS
Macro Maps
Predictably, Macro was by far the most popular and competitive category. A total of 41 maps were submitted primarily into the Macro category. Though creativity certainly doesn't hurt, this category mostly came down to clean and solid execution.
"It has various routes, but there are only a few routes in the big frame, so the game will flow in the early stage, but the MACRO game will be done over time."
Judge's Commentary:
Features an in-base natural.
Expansions can be taken in a natural flow.
Each players' clump of bases if relatively far from the other players', usually ensuring macro games.
Fairly standard macro map with plenty of choices of expansions after the natural. No matter where you take your 3rd, you will have an option of a different 4th as well. The game will constantly evolve depending which 3rd gets taken because then it opens up multiple different options for a 4th. Expanding both vertically and horizontally has their individual benefits. Early game the rocks play a huge role, choking the map off and restricting flow but come middle and end game once they are taken down it creates another (albeit choked) path for the attacker to get around the map.
The middle of the map is quite choked off, but out of each choke gives a good defender's advantage if needed.
Watchtowers see the entire middle forcing players to hug the outside paths if they want to stay clear of vision.
Asteroid Barricade is a large, macro-oriented 2-spawn map. Two plateaus with gold bases and highround ledges on both sides of a direct attack path structure the map into two halves.
The pocket third with long-distance backdoor and alternative third base are rather safe. Both bases are protected by rocked chokes and/or can be blocked by collapsable rock-towers.
Distinctive features:
Several possible expansion patterns. There is a linear vertical expansion pattern, but also a safe pocket third base that allows to expand towards the forward gold base as well as a zick-zack from pocket third back towards map's side.
Open vs. closed - a dense valley connects the two opponents directly, while several sets of ramps allow to cross and traverse between the open areas in the NE and SW, which act as hubs towards the linear expansions as well as an attacking path into the opponent's gold base.
The concept of staggered chokes on each path as a result of the traversing paths and rocks/rock-towers.
The aforementioned rocked chokes and rock-towers open and block additional direct paths into third/fourth.
The double watchtower is used to control the center from the ledges that define the valley and can be used defensively as well as offensively.
A small channel runs through the center of the map, guarded by Watch Towers from the cliffs above. Third bases are open to offensive strikes, but defendable through tight positions, some of which that can be opened up.
Standard rush distance, boundary size and mineral lines, with little deviation from the norm in macro maps.
Round in shape, double rocks blocking two offensive channels by the diagonal third base, a rock tower to help assist in the vertical base defense. Water for your units to splash around in the center.
Lots of smaller pathways that lead all around the map. Very similar to Abyssal Reef in that sense. Main, Natural and your choice of 3rd are all fairly easy to hold.
Expanding after your 4th becomes tricky because you either take the bottom corner bases which are a little further by ground but still offer great protection or you expand northward spreading yourself out much more.
Three Watchtowers throughout the map helps you take control of all the zig zags & army movements.
A warm and inviting macro map with an accelerated beginning economy of one mineral patch.
Fourth bases and beyond contain six mineral patches (aside from one, less defendable base). This is to accelerate early strategies and push the midgame forward, but not enable an easy late-game transition. Games will become scrappier even with further expansions being taken.
Standard rush distance, comfortable elevation variation. Many positional points, but enough space for flanking in specific matchups, such as Zerg versus Terran or Protoss versus Terran.
Rush Maps
The Rush category was one that we struggled with with a total of 32 total submissions. This was the only category that had more submissions in TLMC8 than TLMC7. Of these rush maps, we felt the following featured the most interesting rush concept:
"Features a very short attack route with a narrow, middle opening that is 2x2 in size. "
"The Hunger Game, which is the initial version of the Dasan Station, is a base that resembles the Dasan station in many areas, such as an aggressive base, a difficult gold base, and various attack routes, but is a relatively normal map."
Judge's Commentary: You can certainly tell this map was made by the creator of Dasan Station.
Maxwell Platform is a revision of the famous Brood War map, "Rush Hour" with exploring collapsing towers to block off entrances to the natural bases.
This map has 3 different spawn locations which can determine different ways how the game could be played. It is very rare in Starcraft II to have such an open natural with two entrances, and also have ways of closing them off.
Also with three spawns locations the games played could be varied since players could spawn closer if they spawn in the middle base or spawn top to bottom.
This map has a open natural with two entrances players have great potential for early game harassment since the natural has two entrances.
New Maps
24 maps were primarily submitted in this category and in general a combination of creative ideas and execution on those ideas dominated this category. Hopefully some of these maps will leave your scratching your head and really turn the game upside down.
'Paradise Lost' is an epic poem of the British poet, John Milton. This is the theme of the fall of man and the possibility of salvation.
Paradise Lost' is a map that further enhances the island expansion's usability. Through 'New Gettysburg', we noticed island expansions give another fun at Starcraft II. In this map, new elements are applied to use more active island expansions.
Sky Gate (Video) 'Sky Gate' is like Destructible Rock you know, but it blocks the air path. Air units as well as ground units can attack this gate. it is the same as Destructible Rock, with 2000hp and 3 armor.
Narrow Path (Video) 'Narrow Path' is created to help for players. If the first island resources were depleted, we could see that a lot of hands were going through the process of sending workers to the second island. To solve this problem, this map is applied 'Narrow Path' with a small amount of minerals and Sight Blockers. It is clogged with four minerals of resource 10, and it is necessary to secure the sight to gather the minerals.
There are three island expansions near each player's the main.
Air Blocker blocks the area around the islands, and is marked in blue.
At 6, 12 o'clock, there is 'Sky Gate' blocking the air route, which can be destroyed to open a new air route.
There is 'Narrow Path' between the islands. Through this path, workers can be sent to the new island.
The first island expansion can be easily defended by building a defensive tower(such as Missle Turret) on the side of the main base, but It requires a larger defensive radius for a large number of island expansions.
The reason for applying a small amount of minerals without applying Destructible Rock is as follows,
Sending troops to the island to destroy the rocks quickly causes loss of strength. (Especially, since the middle game)
The rocks can also be used from the attacker, which reduces the stability.
Unlike the rocks, minerals can be gathered by only workers in the island expansion.
A 2 player rotational map. Features a neutral force fields to produce new gameplays. Multiple assault routes are available. Designed like Asian mountains.
The primary feature would be a pocket island next to main. It acts similar to islands of New Gettysburg, but its limits are different. As it is placed at the edge of whole map, air-attacks can be blocked within main-natural(the one connected to main at first). Units on main-natural becomes air blockers for the island.
Imagine when enemy's air harass overcame all defenses and landed on your island. Terran can use Medivacs and Protoss can use Photon Overcharge. But if you are Zerg and don't have Spire tech, it would be extremely difficult to defend your isle. To prevent this, the island became a half-island and is blocked with neutral force fields. With this, Zerg can take island relatively faster and also defend it well. To prevent Terran's abnormally fast island expansion, there is also a Force Field at town-building site. Terran can still land command center here, but cannot do it on right place.
The map has a lot of narrow routes, like in Abyssal Reef. Four of these ramps have Force Fields, which are breakable by Zerg and Protoss(after early games), but nearly unbreakable to Terran. This makes the route choices of Zerg more diverse than Terrans. Highlands on the middle are included. The wide cliffs with no ramps were only usable by Terrans in TvZ as mobility of Terran surpasses Zerg a lot. I hope this Force Fielded-ramp becomes the opposite to those cliffs.
There is a unique choke in front of Third base(excluding the island). By covering three directions at the end of initial rush route, player can defend easily at early games. Zerg can use side roads to do same thing.
This medium-sized macro map features a grid of alternating high ground pods, inspired by the BW proleague map "Geometry", encouraging players to use them to establish defensive positions. Destructible rocks initially block several paths and make certain bases easier to take. But once the rocks are down, despite the map's constricting appearance, it becomes quite open - since the pods are so close together, it's easy to move between adjacent pods to flank from a side ramp, and numerous possible routes are available to traverse the map. The map offers 2 choices of 3rd base: a standard, fairly vulnerable base on the low ground, and a protected base located behind the natural wall, but with a reduced resource count of only 6 mineral nodes and 1 geyser.
Multiple alternating high ground pods allow for defensive positioning as well as flanking and outmaneuvering
Rocks slightly restrict initial pathing while allowing the full grid to be opened up later
Choice of a protected 3rd accessible from the nat with only 6 minerals and 1 gas, or a more vulnerable standard 3rd
The concept of a dense grid of high ground pods hasn't ever been seen on a ladder map (this was close to being the primary category but I wasn't sure if it was actually experimental enough). And while not a critical feature, the map has 2 instances of reduced resource bases set at 6 mineral nodes and 1 geyser: the protected 3rd is a safer but less rewarding choice than the alternate 3rd, and the high ground 4th/5th is very positionally important and already very close to 2 full bases, so the resources are lowered to compensate.
Experimental Resource Maps
This was the smallest category sitting at 14 maps submitted. The finalists that were picked utilized their extra-resource bases in thoughtful ways. In addition, the following were simply the most solid map designs in the category.
Top Right and Bottom Left quadrants are designed to make players choose between having a stronger Mineral income over gas, which also will expose players to the many attack paths at the north, or choosing the safer and less open Bottom, where bases have the standard amount of resources, but because of the strategical value of the southern avenue, it can very easily be used to make strong positional pushes.
Natural bases have 1000 hp 1 armor destructible debris, in order to allow for the potential of slightly stronger timing pushes, which might discourage players from being too passive early game.
Central Debris near the Xel'naga Tower each have 1000 HP and 1 armor, and they are in such a number as to give players granularity over other type of destructible debris such as huge diagonal rocks, and give players the ability to decide if they want to commit to simply destroying a couple of the lightly armored rocks, and maybe risk getting itself on a nasty chokepoint if the opponent discovers him, but get across faster, or destroy all the debris, and open the entire path. The choice is up to the player.
“Bandarlog Ruins” is from King Louis' "Monkey People" in Walt Disney's Jungle Book
It features specific mineral patches to allow for a different early game economy. The map provides 500/350 on main, 900/500 on natural and 1500/900 beyond that to really force players to expand away beyond third even faster than LotV kickstarted economy allows in comparison to the usual pattern of ideal cap of 3-4 bases. The symmetry is a dual-rotational concept to allow very balanced thirds as well as similar rush distances between vertical and horizontal spawn without the typical issues from pure rotational or axial symmetry 4-spawn maps.
The mains and natural expansion use 500/350 and 900/540 patches respectively, which is a reaction to LotV mineral economy and its boost to the early game and the rational 3-4 base cap.
The concept of a rush map on a 4-spawn map is interesting and difficult at the same time, because of the gamble for a timing attack or all-in versus the longer game. The mineral count was also adjusted to allow fewer "economical space" for attacks going wrong and consequently a slower start with the bigger bonus when rather gambling on quicker expansions.
The dual-rotational symmetry as well as the specific mineral patches with 500/350 on main, 900/500 on natural and 1500/900 beyond that
A long snowy map with many bases juggling back and forth. Bases placed farther away from the opponent have less mineral income, with 6/2 mineral lines, where more aggressive bases are standard 8/2 mineral lines. There is heavy elevation variance throughout a diagonal stripe pattern across the map. Avenues are choked, but open enough for moderately large armies to fight.
All "pocketed" bases have lower mineral incomes, as a tradeoff for their safety and lack of offensive positioning, compared to offensive and riskier bases with more standard and acceptable income rates.
The map is large enough for varying economic plays, but with the different facing angles of each mineral line, and their surrounding terrains, many different aggressive strategies as well as aggressive positioning and contains will be effective across all matchups.
A pocket third with lower income, attached by a ramp to the natural as well as the main for potential aggressive use, as well as quick(er) reinforcement.
What's Next?
Congratulations to all the mappers who made it to the finals. There were a lot of repeat names this season, with almost every finalist mapper having had a finalist map in a previous TLMC. In this field of finalists, you have:
Youngrustler, a relative "newcomer" who's submitted many maps in previous contests.
RQM, creator of Judgement, a GSL map
Jacky (TLMC7 1st), creator of New Gettysberg and winner of TLMC7
NegativeZero (TLMC6 1st, TLMC7 2nd), creator of Apotheosis and Terraform
Enekh (TLMC6 3rd), creator of Dasan Station, has two maps this season
SidiantheBard (2nd Place TLMC3), creator of Habitation Station and Abyssal Reef, has two maps this season
Samro225am, creator of many many TLMC finalists throughout the years, has two maps this season.
AVEX, creator of Invader, has 4/4 possible submissions in the top 15!
Next, between Feb 20rd-Feb 26th, BaseTradeTV will be hosting their BasetradeTV Map Test Tournament exclusively on these maps. Come watch top notch players play try to abuse these new maps to the best of their abilities. Afterwards, mappers will be given 1 week to balance and touch up their maps for the final judging process where you can vote for your favorite maps. The entire process is detailed here. So what do you think about the finalists? What are your favorite maps? Which maps got snubbed? Leave your thoughts and comments below!
I'm extremely disappointed with the judging this TLMC. It isn't unusual for some suspect maps to sneak into the finalists (Dasan Station, Frozen Zone, Biome), but this time the number of them seems rather high (Blood Boil, Paradise Lost, Bandarlog Ruins, Hunger Game, Maxwell Platform all have some obvious issues). Not only that, some of the maps are categorically awful.
Eremita has an 18 second (ramp to ramp) rush distance. That's shorter than Steppes of War. And unlike some better thought out maps with short rush distances like Dasan Station (I didn't think I'd ever say that), there isn't any sort of defensive compensation for the short rush distances. I can't even fathom the reasoning for allowing this map past the first round, let alone into the finals.
Geumgangsan's neutral force fields are horrible. First of all they don't appear on the minimap or through the fog of war. They absolutely should. And because this isn't hard to do at all, I'll assume the mapmaker was being careless and none of the judges actually opened up the map. Secondly they mess with pathing. Units don't know how to path around forcefields and will get stuck on them. You thought the air blockers on New Gettysburg were bad? This is a lot worse. Those forcefields in the middle of the map are in optimal positions to get units stuck. Third of all neutral forcefields aren't in the slightest balanced. Zergs can take the pocket base after building ravagers, Protoss after building colossi or archons. Terran has to build a thor. So Terran's chances in a macro game against Zerg or Protoss on this map aren't great to say the least. At least against Protoss you can try to rush out siege tanks and drop them inside the pocket base to siege the main from the inside. I really miss losing PvTs on Return of the King.
I really hope they take the time to review the whole process before TLMC9. The timeline was a joke. Three days or the 24 hours they turned into aren't enough time to evaluate the maps, and it really showed. Maybe review the judging process too. Even under the circumstances selecting Eremita and Geumgangsan is very hard to justify. The time given to the mapmakers wasn't enough either--many of the submissions to the Experimental Resource Map category were simply existing maps adapted for the category, and many of the submissions to the other categories felt rushed. The categories should be reviewed too (though that's more on Blizzard)--the fact that there isn't a category for middle-of-the-road maps that are neither "macro" nor "micro" enough is laughable. Hwangsan for example should be part of that category.
On the positive side of things, the BaseTradeTV tournament has looked good so far. I'm really looking forward to the second part of it. During the first part Keres Passage looked pretty good, and Windwaker, Ascension to Aiur, Hwangsan and Asteroid Barricade all looked reasonable.
Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
On February 20 2017 17:04 Fatam wrote: Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
Congrats to the finalists and looking forward to the next TLMC!
Obviously a lot of issues have already been brought up, specifically the timeline being fairly absurd. Admittedly there just wasn't a lot of time to properly test the maps. I just wanted to address my personal opinion on the maps you mentioned (obviously subjective).
Regarding Interloper, I don't think it's a bad map at all, however I think that the third is simply too open. I can't really see a way for Protoss to hold a well executed Ravager-Ling-Bane attack. That's the biggest turn off for me, and perhaps it could use some adjustments such as destructible rocks blocking the entrance at the 12/6 o clock.
Battle on the Boardwalk honestly seems like nothing but a ling bane fest to me. It's meant to be a rush map, sure, but this would be a disaster in ZvZ, and probably extremely difficult in both TvZ and PvZ as well. I do not think two entrances to the main is a viable option. Having the back entrance only 2 hexes wide is a good idea, but you can't defend two locations in PvZ that early on when photon overcharge is a huge part in mounting such a defense.
On the subject of Cloud City, I just don't really see how this is a rush map, especially with a 34 second N2N rush distance. I see it more as an aggressive macro map, and a huge thing that jumps out to me is how insanely wide open the middle of the map is, with no effective area for P/T to take an engagement against Zerg. With proper creep spread and vision (easily obtained with the watchtower), Zerg can take engagements of a lifetime extremely easily, on the only real attack path (going around the side vs Z opens you waaaaay up to taking huge damage from counterattacks).
Harmonize has several key issues as well, one of which once again is that I just don't see this as a rush map. 38 second N2N rush distance is extremely long for a rush map, so the only real way this passes as one is because of the ramp being very exposed due to its positioning. This means that the ramp position is key in why it could be considered such a map, and at the same time, I think that the ramp being where it is is nonviable. It's crucial vs Zerg all ins for protoss to be able to rewall behind their initial wall, and the ramp position simply makes that impossible because there isn't enough space. Honestly I think the ramp position should have been moved, and it should have been submitted as a macro map. It's fairly easy to get to four bases, and the fifth isn't any more difficult than on standard macro maps, so I have no idea why this is in the rush category, except for that main-natural ramp (seen in spoiler below).
Regarding your comment on, what I assume is, Bandarlog Ruins, I do not think this breaks that rule. The rule references rising lava as an example of something too crazy, because you absolutely need to know it's there coming in. Bandarlog has really weird resource distribution, but as soon as you're in the game, you click a mineral patch (which are visibly depleted), and see "hey that has not very many minerals on it" and play accordingly. Sure it's going to take some time to figure out what is and isn't optimal on it, but that's the case for every "new" map.
Of course all of this is subjective, and I think it's very good to have a healthy debate around map selection. Just throwing in my two cents.
On February 20 2017 17:04 Fatam wrote: Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
Congrats to the finalists and looking forward to the next TLMC!
Obviously a lot of issues have already been brought up, specifically the timeline being fairly absurd. Admittedly there just wasn't a lot of time to properly test the maps. I just wanted to address my personal opinion on the maps you mentioned (obviously subjective).
Regarding Interloper, I don't think it's a bad map at all, however I think that the third is simply too open. I can't really see a way for Protoss to hold a well executed Ravager-Ling-Bane attack. That's the biggest turn off for me, and perhaps it could use some adjustments such as destructible rocks blocking the entrance at the 12/6 o clock.
Battle on the Boardwalk honestly seems like nothing but a ling bane fest to me. It's meant to be a rush map, sure, but this would be a disaster in ZvZ, and probably extremely difficult in both TvZ and PvZ as well. I do not think two entrances to the main is a viable option. Having the back entrance only 2 hexes wide is a good idea, but you can't defend two locations in PvZ that early on when photon overcharge is a huge part in mounting such a defense.
On the subject of Cloud City, I just don't really see how this is a rush map, especially with a 34 second N2N rush distance. I see it more as an aggressive macro map, and a huge thing that jumps out to me is how insanely wide open the middle of the map is, with no effective area for P/T to take an engagement against Zerg. With proper creep spread and vision (easily obtained with the watchtower), Zerg can take engagements of a lifetime extremely easily, on the only real attack path (going around the side vs Z opens you waaaaay up to taking huge damage from counterattacks).
Harmonize has several key issues as well, one of which once again is that I just don't see this as a rush map. 38 second N2N rush distance is extremely long for a rush map, so the only real way this passes as one is because of the ramp being very exposed due to its positioning. This means that the ramp position is key in why it could be considered such a map, and at the same time, I think that the ramp being where it is is nonviable. It's crucial vs Zerg all ins for protoss to be able to rewall behind their initial wall, and the ramp position simply makes that impossible because there isn't enough space. Honestly I think the ramp position should have been moved, and it should have been submitted as a macro map. It's fairly easy to get to four bases, and the fifth isn't any more difficult than on standard macro maps, so I have no idea why this is in the rush category, except for that main-natural ramp (seen in spoiler below).
Regarding your comment on, what I assume is, Bandarlog Ruins, I do not think this breaks that rule. The rule references rising lava as an example of something too crazy, because you absolutely need to know it's there coming in. Bandarlog has really weird resource distribution, but as soon as you're in the game, you click a mineral patch (which are visibly depleted), and see "hey that has not very many minerals on it" and play accordingly. Sure it's going to take some time to figure out what is and isn't optimal on it, but that's the case for every "new" map.
Of course all of this is subjective, and I think it's very good to have a healthy debate around map selection. Just throwing in my two cents.
Thanks for having a debate, transparency is great. Plus I could talk about maps / SC2 all day so it's fun.
The new map I was talking about was the air/turtle map Paradise Lost. Although judging by your response that may have been the map you meant and you just got the names mixed up. For me, having the minerals (which aren't very easy to see, by the way, due to doodads) and the "air gate" on top of that layout is pretty noob/casual unfriendly, which I'm sure is why that rule is in there. But I don't think there's any more discussion to have there, since you either think it crosses the line or you don't.
@ Harmonize, that's my map so thanks for the feedback @ the ramp, I'll probably change that if I decide to ever make a new version and submit it in the future. @ it being not suitable for the rush category, we were told 35 seconds main ramp to main ramp or less, and Harmonize clocked in at 34, so should we have been told less? It seems a little unfair. Keep in mind the macro category still stated that maps should strongly encourage macro play, which I wasn't sure Harmonize really did that strongly, soo I submitted it to Rush because it met the requirements you guys listed. I think "hybrid" maps like this, aka maps that weren't really strongly Rush nor Macro, maps that equally allowed any kind of game, kind of got painted into a bad corner this TLMC. Not saying Harmonize would have finalized in Macro, but still, it's an ill feeling. I submitted another "in-between" map like this that clocked in at 30 sec rush distance into the Rush category and I wonder if it was discarded for the same reasons.
@ Cloud City, it certainly looks from the overview like the rush distance is fairly short. Maybe I misjudged the overview but I look at a ton of overviews and I'm pretty sure that main ramp to main ramp is less than 35. Maybe not by much, though. Either way, I think you're kind of looking at the ZvX situation wrongly here. Since the really open part of the middle there aren't any early bases, no one is forced to engage Zerg there, so your dream scenario of Z having all these awesome game-ending fights may never happen, if the P or T is playing correctly to the map. They can just stay on the less open highground to do all their defending and attacking.
@ Boardwalk, I 100% agree that ZvZ could be a potential shitfest, but I think every other MU could be fun. PvZ is not the issue you make it to be, IMO. It's pretty easy to hold a single 2x2 hole and your main ramp when the enemy has to send lings on a long, seperate walk to both locations. Like not even hard, honestly. In this case you simply pylon + adept at the 2x2 place, and since the 2x2 extends for quite some distance you put your initial 2x2 a little ways in, so that if they kill the first pylon you can place another behind it and still wall. Anyway, is ZvZ being hyper aggressive enough to death sentence the map? Maybe. I'd be interested to see what you thought of the map if Sidian simply added a neutral raised supply depot in the 2x2 hole.
@ interloper (actually I got the name wrong, it's Exosphere. Oops, too many maps to keep track of :O) I see your point. Maybe if he added a ramp down so that the third is a bit more defensible.
I wanna play all of these. My head is exploding from only looking at these and trying to make sense of them. I think many of these are super interesting and so naturally some of these will just not be viable for ladder, but I'm glad since this will come with quite the different flavour than what we're used to
On February 20 2017 18:27 Fatam wrote: For me, having the minerals (which aren't very easy to see, by the way, due to doodads) and the "air gate" on top of that layout is pretty noob/casual unfriendly
Seems like you're not the only one who thinks so, because when me and Ej_ played on the map, I got tutorials for the sky gate and stuff. When your map gives out tutorials nobody actually has the time to read during a game, maybe you made it a bit too complicated.
That said, the map is fun to play so I don't really mind that much that it made it so far. There are other maps I dislike much more.
On February 20 2017 17:04 Fatam wrote: Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
Congrats to the finalists and looking forward to the next TLMC!
Obviously a lot of issues have already been brought up, specifically the timeline being fairly absurd. Admittedly there just wasn't a lot of time to properly test the maps. I just wanted to address my personal opinion on the maps you mentioned (obviously subjective).
Regarding Interloper, I don't think it's a bad map at all, however I think that the third is simply too open. I can't really see a way for Protoss to hold a well executed Ravager-Ling-Bane attack. That's the biggest turn off for me, and perhaps it could use some adjustments such as destructible rocks blocking the entrance at the 12/6 o clock.
Battle on the Boardwalk honestly seems like nothing but a ling bane fest to me. It's meant to be a rush map, sure, but this would be a disaster in ZvZ, and probably extremely difficult in both TvZ and PvZ as well. I do not think two entrances to the main is a viable option. Having the back entrance only 2 hexes wide is a good idea, but you can't defend two locations in PvZ that early on when photon overcharge is a huge part in mounting such a defense.
On the subject of Cloud City, I just don't really see how this is a rush map, especially with a 34 second N2N rush distance. I see it more as an aggressive macro map, and a huge thing that jumps out to me is how insanely wide open the middle of the map is, with no effective area for P/T to take an engagement against Zerg. With proper creep spread and vision (easily obtained with the watchtower), Zerg can take engagements of a lifetime extremely easily, on the only real attack path (going around the side vs Z opens you waaaaay up to taking huge damage from counterattacks).
Harmonize has several key issues as well, one of which once again is that I just don't see this as a rush map. 38 second N2N rush distance is extremely long for a rush map, so the only real way this passes as one is because of the ramp being very exposed due to its positioning. This means that the ramp position is key in why it could be considered such a map, and at the same time, I think that the ramp being where it is is nonviable. It's crucial vs Zerg all ins for protoss to be able to rewall behind their initial wall, and the ramp position simply makes that impossible because there isn't enough space. Honestly I think the ramp position should have been moved, and it should have been submitted as a macro map. It's fairly easy to get to four bases, and the fifth isn't any more difficult than on standard macro maps, so I have no idea why this is in the rush category, except for that main-natural ramp (seen in spoiler below).
Regarding your comment on, what I assume is, Bandarlog Ruins, I do not think this breaks that rule. The rule references rising lava as an example of something too crazy, because you absolutely need to know it's there coming in. Bandarlog has really weird resource distribution, but as soon as you're in the game, you click a mineral patch (which are visibly depleted), and see "hey that has not very many minerals on it" and play accordingly. Sure it's going to take some time to figure out what is and isn't optimal on it, but that's the case for every "new" map.
Of course all of this is subjective, and I think it's very good to have a healthy debate around map selection. Just throwing in my two cents.
Thanks for having a debate, transparency is great. Plus I could talk about maps / SC2 all day so it's fun.
The new map I was talking about was the air/turtle map Paradise Lost. Although judging by your response that may have been the map you meant and you just got the names mixed up. For me, having the minerals (which aren't very easy to see, by the way, due to doodads) and the "air gate" on top of that layout is pretty noob/casual unfriendly, which I'm sure is why that rule is in there. But I don't think there's any more discussion to have there, since you either think it crosses the line or you don't.
@ Harmonize, that's my map so thanks for the feedback @ the ramp, I'll probably change that if I decide to ever make a new version and submit it in the future. @ it being not suitable for the rush category, we were told 35 seconds main ramp to main ramp or less, and Harmonize clocked in at 34, so should we have been told less? It seems a little unfair. Keep in mind the macro category still stated that maps should strongly encourage macro play, which I wasn't sure Harmonize really did that strongly, soo I submitted it to Rush because it met the requirements you guys listed. I think "hybrid" maps like this, aka maps that weren't really strongly Rush nor Macro, maps that equally allowed any kind of game, kind of got painted into a bad corner this TLMC. Not saying Harmonize would have finalized in Macro, but still, it's an ill feeling. I submitted another "in-between" map like this that clocked in at 30 sec rush distance into the Rush category and I wonder if it was discarded for the same reasons.
@ Cloud City, it certainly looks from the overview like the rush distance is pretty dang short. Maybe I misjudged the overview but I look at a ton of overviews and I'm pretty sure that main ramp to main ramp is less than 35.
@ Boardwalk, I 100% agree that ZvZ could be a potential shitfest, but I think every other MU could be fun. PvZ is not the issue you make it to be, IMO. It's pretty easy to hold a single 2x2 hole and your main ramp when the enemy has to send lings on a long, seperate walk to both locations. Like not even hard, honestly. In this case you simply pylon + adept at the 2x2 place, and since the 2x2 extends for quite some distance you put your initial 2x2 a little ways in, so that if they kill the first pylon you can place another behind it and still wall. Anyway, is ZvZ being hyper aggressive enough to death sentence the map? Maybe. I'd be interested to see what you thought of the map if Sidian simply added a neutral raised supply depot in the 2x2 hole.
@ interloper (actually I got the name wrong, it's Exosphere. Oops, too many maps to keep track of :O) I see your point. Maybe if he added a ramp down so that the third is a bit more defensible.
Honestly, I really dislike that maps have to be labelled "macro" or "rush." I would very much like to see a category in the middle, because this would fit there (along with a TON of other maps). 34 seconds R2R rush distance seems really weird to me as the definition for a rush map. I don't make the rules, but I'd think 30 should be the upper limit. Making the R2R rush distance limit lower and instituting a Macro/Rush category would be a really cool thing for them to consider for the next TLMC. I'll make sure to mention it to them.
No, I meant Bandarlog Ruins. But having the discussion about Paradise Lost, initially I wasn't super sold on it until the initial games from the first tournament played out. I completely agree that the line of sight blockers over the narrow path minerals should be removed at the very least. I'd also agree that the minerals should probably be removed, but that's more up for debate. The sky gate I think is a really cool feature since air blockers have been deemed acceptable.
Regarding Boardwalk, we have seen dual main entrances a couple of times. As the example that I've had the most experience with, let's take New Pompeii from Shoutcraft Clan Wars. This was a different beast, with both ramps being pretty wide, but every single game that I saw on it was a shitfest of ling bane all ins. Especially in LotV, with the game starting faster and Overlords being very ineffective ways of seeing a ling bane all in coming, I just really think this is a death sentence for a map.
My biggest problem with Exosphere is the lack of a third base for Zerg. Perhaps this could have been considered back in HotS, but with 3 larva per inject, I really don't think you can confine a Zerg to 2 bases. The 10/4 oclock bases are fare too difficult to defend against drops, and the rocks don't allow you to plant a third hatchers at the 7/1 expansions until far too late. From a Zerg perspective, that's the biggest issue for me. I also think that the rocks open up far too easy an attack angle on the natural base, that will be exceedingly difficult to hold for the other races.
I really appreciate you and Kantuva (on reddit) taking the time to have this kind of a debate. A fair bit of my experience with some mappers over the past year (most recently, Sunshine's not-so-veiled comment on the other thread saying that Avex and I are friends, Avex got 4 maps in, clearly rigged) has been insult ridden "arguments" rather than actual attempts to see each others' point of view. I think this kind of stuff is important and hopefully we can improve the format going forward.
On February 20 2017 17:04 Fatam wrote: Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
Congrats to the finalists and looking forward to the next TLMC!
Obviously a lot of issues have already been brought up, specifically the timeline being fairly absurd. Admittedly there just wasn't a lot of time to properly test the maps. I just wanted to address my personal opinion on the maps you mentioned (obviously subjective).
Regarding Interloper, I don't think it's a bad map at all, however I think that the third is simply too open. I can't really see a way for Protoss to hold a well executed Ravager-Ling-Bane attack. That's the biggest turn off for me, and perhaps it could use some adjustments such as destructible rocks blocking the entrance at the 12/6 o clock.
Battle on the Boardwalk honestly seems like nothing but a ling bane fest to me. It's meant to be a rush map, sure, but this would be a disaster in ZvZ, and probably extremely difficult in both TvZ and PvZ as well. I do not think two entrances to the main is a viable option. Having the back entrance only 2 hexes wide is a good idea, but you can't defend two locations in PvZ that early on when photon overcharge is a huge part in mounting such a defense.
On the subject of Cloud City, I just don't really see how this is a rush map, especially with a 34 second N2N rush distance. I see it more as an aggressive macro map, and a huge thing that jumps out to me is how insanely wide open the middle of the map is, with no effective area for P/T to take an engagement against Zerg. With proper creep spread and vision (easily obtained with the watchtower), Zerg can take engagements of a lifetime extremely easily, on the only real attack path (going around the side vs Z opens you waaaaay up to taking huge damage from counterattacks).
Harmonize has several key issues as well, one of which once again is that I just don't see this as a rush map. 38 second N2N rush distance is extremely long for a rush map, so the only real way this passes as one is because of the ramp being very exposed due to its positioning. This means that the ramp position is key in why it could be considered such a map, and at the same time, I think that the ramp being where it is is nonviable. It's crucial vs Zerg all ins for protoss to be able to rewall behind their initial wall, and the ramp position simply makes that impossible because there isn't enough space. Honestly I think the ramp position should have been moved, and it should have been submitted as a macro map. It's fairly easy to get to four bases, and the fifth isn't any more difficult than on standard macro maps, so I have no idea why this is in the rush category, except for that main-natural ramp (seen in spoiler below).
Regarding your comment on, what I assume is, Bandarlog Ruins, I do not think this breaks that rule. The rule references rising lava as an example of something too crazy, because you absolutely need to know it's there coming in. Bandarlog has really weird resource distribution, but as soon as you're in the game, you click a mineral patch (which are visibly depleted), and see "hey that has not very many minerals on it" and play accordingly. Sure it's going to take some time to figure out what is and isn't optimal on it, but that's the case for every "new" map.
Of course all of this is subjective, and I think it's very good to have a healthy debate around map selection. Just throwing in my two cents.
Thanks for having a debate, transparency is great. Plus I could talk about maps / SC2 all day so it's fun.
The new map I was talking about was the air/turtle map Paradise Lost. Although judging by your response that may have been the map you meant and you just got the names mixed up. For me, having the minerals (which aren't very easy to see, by the way, due to doodads) and the "air gate" on top of that layout is pretty noob/casual unfriendly, which I'm sure is why that rule is in there. But I don't think there's any more discussion to have there, since you either think it crosses the line or you don't.
@ Harmonize, that's my map so thanks for the feedback @ the ramp, I'll probably change that if I decide to ever make a new version and submit it in the future. @ it being not suitable for the rush category, we were told 35 seconds main ramp to main ramp or less, and Harmonize clocked in at 34, so should we have been told less? It seems a little unfair. Keep in mind the macro category still stated that maps should strongly encourage macro play, which I wasn't sure Harmonize really did that strongly, soo I submitted it to Rush because it met the requirements you guys listed. I think "hybrid" maps like this, aka maps that weren't really strongly Rush nor Macro, maps that equally allowed any kind of game, kind of got painted into a bad corner this TLMC. Not saying Harmonize would have finalized in Macro, but still, it's an ill feeling. I submitted another "in-between" map like this that clocked in at 30 sec rush distance into the Rush category and I wonder if it was discarded for the same reasons.
@ Cloud City, it certainly looks from the overview like the rush distance is pretty dang short. Maybe I misjudged the overview but I look at a ton of overviews and I'm pretty sure that main ramp to main ramp is less than 35.
@ Boardwalk, I 100% agree that ZvZ could be a potential shitfest, but I think every other MU could be fun. PvZ is not the issue you make it to be, IMO. It's pretty easy to hold a single 2x2 hole and your main ramp when the enemy has to send lings on a long, seperate walk to both locations. Like not even hard, honestly. In this case you simply pylon + adept at the 2x2 place, and since the 2x2 extends for quite some distance you put your initial 2x2 a little ways in, so that if they kill the first pylon you can place another behind it and still wall. Anyway, is ZvZ being hyper aggressive enough to death sentence the map? Maybe. I'd be interested to see what you thought of the map if Sidian simply added a neutral raised supply depot in the 2x2 hole.
@ interloper (actually I got the name wrong, it's Exosphere. Oops, too many maps to keep track of :O) I see your point. Maybe if he added a ramp down so that the third is a bit more defensible.
Honestly, I really dislike that maps have to be labelled "macro" or "rush." I would very much like to see a category in the middle, because this would fit there (along with a TON of other maps). 34 seconds R2R rush distance seems really weird to me as the definition for a rush map. I don't make the rules, but I'd think 30 should be the upper limit. Making the R2R rush distance limit lower and instituting a Macro/Rush category would be a really cool thing for them to consider for the next TLMC. I'll make sure to mention it to them.
No, I meant Bandarlog Ruins. But having the discussion about Paradise Lost, initially I wasn't super sold on it until the initial games from the first tournament played out. I completely agree that the line of sight blockers over the narrow path minerals should be removed at the very least. I'd also agree that the minerals should probably be removed, but that's more up for debate. The sky gate I think is a really cool feature since air blockers have been deemed acceptable.
Regarding Boardwalk, we have seen dual main entrances a couple of times. As the example that I've had the most experience with, let's take New Pompeii from Shoutcraft Clan Wars. This was a different beast, with both ramps being pretty wide, but every single game that I saw on it was a shitfest of ling bane all ins. Especially in LotV, with the game starting faster and Overlords being very ineffective ways of seeing a ling bane all in coming, I just really think this is a death sentence for a map.
My biggest problem with Exosphere is the lack of a third base for Zerg. Perhaps this could have been considered back in HotS, but with 3 larva per inject, I really don't think you can confine a Zerg to 2 bases. The 10/4 oclock bases are fare too difficult to defend against drops, and the rocks don't allow you to plant a third hatchers at the 7/1 expansions until far too late. From a Zerg perspective, that's the biggest issue for me. I also think that the rocks open up far too easy an attack angle on the natural base, that will be exceedingly difficult to hold for the other races.
I really appreciate you and Kantuva (on reddit) taking the time to have this kind of a debate. A fair bit of my experience with some mappers over the past year (most recently, Sunshine's not-so-veiled comment on the other thread saying that Avex and I are friends, Avex got 4 maps in, clearly rigged) has been insult ridden "arguments" rather than actual attempts to see each others' point of view. I think this kind of stuff is important and hopefully we can improve the format going forward.
Edit: added a point about Boardwalk
There we completely agree. I've been saying for a long time on discord, etc. that the categories for TLMC should simply be Standard and Nonstandard and leave it at that - and we'd have a much better time all around. No confusion and a much better finalist map pool result because you're not forced to take 3 experimental resource maps or whatever the weakest category is.
But monk/plexa said it's simply not possible due to the categories being Blizzard's thing. I thought that was a little shortsighted since a simple conversation with someone could probably change that, but hey, it is what it is.
On February 20 2017 17:04 Fatam wrote: Well said Ziggurat. Especially great points regarding the force field map.
I think there is another map or two you could include in the questionable category, but you more or less covered it.
I also think there were some serious snubs. If we only address the Rush Category, let me show you all the maps (that I've seen) that I think were more qualified than 2 out of the 3 Rush finalists, or maybe even 3/3:
Yes, I believe ALL of those Rush maps are better than 2, maybe 3 of the 3 Rush finalists. And there's some others I would include too but I wasn't sure if their authors submitted them as Rush, such as KTV Aurora and one of timmay's.
The macro maps section I don't have huge problems with, I would have chosen 1 or 2 differently but there's nothing egregious there.
I have an issue with the "New" category in that one of your finalists blatantly broke one of the contest rules and you ignored it. It's a cool map and I love its aesthetics but it absolutely breaks the rule which other people obeyed, so it seems unfair that he gets to go hogwild while we thought we couldn't.
Q: How crazy can my maps be? Maps need to be ladder appropriate. This means that features requiring specialist knowledge (rising lava, geysers used to block ramps, etc.) will not be accepted.
Uh, hello? The map absolutely breaks the rule. Why else would you need videos and an essay to teach you the map lol.
Dracula by Timmay (although I sort of understand the exclusion given its similarity in concept to Sequencer. But I also think the two maps would play pretty differently) http://i.imgur.com/NhLGerC.jpg
Disappointment in some of the judging aside, some of the maps that made it are absolutely great, and there's no taking away from them, so I'm looking forward to seeing those make the ladder.
Congrats to the finalists and looking forward to the next TLMC!
Obviously a lot of issues have already been brought up, specifically the timeline being fairly absurd. Admittedly there just wasn't a lot of time to properly test the maps. I just wanted to address my personal opinion on the maps you mentioned (obviously subjective).
Regarding Interloper, I don't think it's a bad map at all, however I think that the third is simply too open. I can't really see a way for Protoss to hold a well executed Ravager-Ling-Bane attack. That's the biggest turn off for me, and perhaps it could use some adjustments such as destructible rocks blocking the entrance at the 12/6 o clock.
Battle on the Boardwalk honestly seems like nothing but a ling bane fest to me. It's meant to be a rush map, sure, but this would be a disaster in ZvZ, and probably extremely difficult in both TvZ and PvZ as well. I do not think two entrances to the main is a viable option. Having the back entrance only 2 hexes wide is a good idea, but you can't defend two locations in PvZ that early on when photon overcharge is a huge part in mounting such a defense.
On the subject of Cloud City, I just don't really see how this is a rush map, especially with a 34 second N2N rush distance. I see it more as an aggressive macro map, and a huge thing that jumps out to me is how insanely wide open the middle of the map is, with no effective area for P/T to take an engagement against Zerg. With proper creep spread and vision (easily obtained with the watchtower), Zerg can take engagements of a lifetime extremely easily, on the only real attack path (going around the side vs Z opens you waaaaay up to taking huge damage from counterattacks).
Harmonize has several key issues as well, one of which once again is that I just don't see this as a rush map. 38 second N2N rush distance is extremely long for a rush map, so the only real way this passes as one is because of the ramp being very exposed due to its positioning. This means that the ramp position is key in why it could be considered such a map, and at the same time, I think that the ramp being where it is is nonviable. It's crucial vs Zerg all ins for protoss to be able to rewall behind their initial wall, and the ramp position simply makes that impossible because there isn't enough space. Honestly I think the ramp position should have been moved, and it should have been submitted as a macro map. It's fairly easy to get to four bases, and the fifth isn't any more difficult than on standard macro maps, so I have no idea why this is in the rush category, except for that main-natural ramp (seen in spoiler below).
Regarding your comment on, what I assume is, Bandarlog Ruins, I do not think this breaks that rule. The rule references rising lava as an example of something too crazy, because you absolutely need to know it's there coming in. Bandarlog has really weird resource distribution, but as soon as you're in the game, you click a mineral patch (which are visibly depleted), and see "hey that has not very many minerals on it" and play accordingly. Sure it's going to take some time to figure out what is and isn't optimal on it, but that's the case for every "new" map.
Of course all of this is subjective, and I think it's very good to have a healthy debate around map selection. Just throwing in my two cents.
Thanks for having a debate, transparency is great. Plus I could talk about maps / SC2 all day so it's fun.
The new map I was talking about was the air/turtle map Paradise Lost. Although judging by your response that may have been the map you meant and you just got the names mixed up. For me, having the minerals (which aren't very easy to see, by the way, due to doodads) and the "air gate" on top of that layout is pretty noob/casual unfriendly, which I'm sure is why that rule is in there. But I don't think there's any more discussion to have there, since you either think it crosses the line or you don't.
@ Harmonize, that's my map so thanks for the feedback @ the ramp, I'll probably change that if I decide to ever make a new version and submit it in the future. @ it being not suitable for the rush category, we were told 35 seconds main ramp to main ramp or less, and Harmonize clocked in at 34, so should we have been told less? It seems a little unfair. Keep in mind the macro category still stated that maps should strongly encourage macro play, which I wasn't sure Harmonize really did that strongly, soo I submitted it to Rush because it met the requirements you guys listed. I think "hybrid" maps like this, aka maps that weren't really strongly Rush nor Macro, maps that equally allowed any kind of game, kind of got painted into a bad corner this TLMC. Not saying Harmonize would have finalized in Macro, but still, it's an ill feeling. I submitted another "in-between" map like this that clocked in at 30 sec rush distance into the Rush category and I wonder if it was discarded for the same reasons.
@ Cloud City, it certainly looks from the overview like the rush distance is pretty dang short. Maybe I misjudged the overview but I look at a ton of overviews and I'm pretty sure that main ramp to main ramp is less than 35.
@ Boardwalk, I 100% agree that ZvZ could be a potential shitfest, but I think every other MU could be fun. PvZ is not the issue you make it to be, IMO. It's pretty easy to hold a single 2x2 hole and your main ramp when the enemy has to send lings on a long, seperate walk to both locations. Like not even hard, honestly. In this case you simply pylon + adept at the 2x2 place, and since the 2x2 extends for quite some distance you put your initial 2x2 a little ways in, so that if they kill the first pylon you can place another behind it and still wall. Anyway, is ZvZ being hyper aggressive enough to death sentence the map? Maybe. I'd be interested to see what you thought of the map if Sidian simply added a neutral raised supply depot in the 2x2 hole.
@ interloper (actually I got the name wrong, it's Exosphere. Oops, too many maps to keep track of :O) I see your point. Maybe if he added a ramp down so that the third is a bit more defensible.
Honestly, I really dislike that maps have to be labelled "macro" or "rush." I would very much like to see a category in the middle, because this would fit there (along with a TON of other maps). 34 seconds R2R rush distance seems really weird to me as the definition for a rush map. I don't make the rules, but I'd think 30 should be the upper limit. Making the R2R rush distance limit lower and instituting a Macro/Rush category would be a really cool thing for them to consider for the next TLMC. I'll make sure to mention it to them.
No, I meant Bandarlog Ruins. But having the discussion about Paradise Lost, initially I wasn't super sold on it until the initial games from the first tournament played out. I completely agree that the line of sight blockers over the narrow path minerals should be removed at the very least. I'd also agree that the minerals should probably be removed, but that's more up for debate. The sky gate I think is a really cool feature since air blockers have been deemed acceptable.
Regarding Boardwalk, we have seen dual main entrances a couple of times. As the example that I've had the most experience with, let's take New Pompeii from Shoutcraft Clan Wars. This was a different beast, with both ramps being pretty wide, but every single game that I saw on it was a shitfest of ling bane all ins. Especially in LotV, with the game starting faster and Overlords being very ineffective ways of seeing a ling bane all in coming, I just really think this is a death sentence for a map.
My biggest problem with Exosphere is the lack of a third base for Zerg. Perhaps this could have been considered back in HotS, but with 3 larva per inject, I really don't think you can confine a Zerg to 2 bases. The 10/4 oclock bases are fare too difficult to defend against drops, and the rocks don't allow you to plant a third hatchers at the 7/1 expansions until far too late. From a Zerg perspective, that's the biggest issue for me. I also think that the rocks open up far too easy an attack angle on the natural base, that will be exceedingly difficult to hold for the other races.
I really appreciate you and Kantuva (on reddit) taking the time to have this kind of a debate. A fair bit of my experience with some mappers over the past year (most recently, Sunshine's not-so-veiled comment on the other thread saying that Avex and I are friends, Avex got 4 maps in, clearly rigged) has been insult ridden "arguments" rather than actual attempts to see each others' point of view. I think this kind of stuff is important and hopefully we can improve the format going forward.
Edit: added a point about Boardwalk
There we completely agree. I've been saying for a long time on discord, etc. that the categories for TLMC should simply be Standard and Nonstandard and leave it at that - and we'd have a much better time all around. No confusion and a much better finalist map pool result because you're not forced to take 3 experimental resource maps or whatever the weakest category is.
But monk/plexa said it's simply not possible due to the categories being Blizzard's thing. I thought that was a little shortsighted since a simple conversation with someone could probably change that, but hey, it is what it is.
Conversations have apparently been had, but I'm gonna shoot Blizz a message about it in the morning. I don't mind the categories, but I think it'd be great to have a middle ground one.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2el9Uzp.jpg)
