|
Yeah i can see why using gameplay to create a baseline for standard maps could be useful, the issue happens when you realize that the gameplay evolves, which would alter the baseline for what can be considered a standard map, that's why Zeromus says the standard maps change overtime, because he's using the gameplay to judge maps instead of judging the maps by themselves (or at least that's what i get out your comment Zero), and since maps can be so extremely varied, it is very hard to achieve a definition of what is standard and what isn't.
One heavy example of these views colliding is King Sejong Station, from my definition the map can't be considered standard, nonethless from a players perspective the map CAN be considered standard because it does allow many different styles of play.
Other example could be my own Foxtrot, from the map view the map CAN be considered standardish, but from a player perspective the map is not because it strengthens certain styles of play and it does not really allow for extremely greedy play.
As i said, this is one of the things that need discussing, because it is an important topic, specially for the playerbase.
/edit, your answer is here Otherworld, i wrote this comment while you were writing yours and it clearly explains what you are talking about, in the differences between how mapmakers view maps, and how players view them.
/edit2 forgot to bold the first edit >.<
/edit3 i also forgot to mention that this whole post was supposed to be an answer to this + Show Spoiler +On November 24 2014 04:29 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2014 04:11 Uvantak wrote:On November 24 2014 03:01 Big J wrote:On November 24 2014 01:20 Uvantak wrote:On November 23 2014 23:19 SatedSC2 wrote:On November 23 2014 22:50 brickrd wrote: sc2: the game where people want to be hand-delivered only the maps that best suit their race and their playstyle or else they have hissy fits and quit playing There are 7 maps. Only 1 was "standard" map last season.* The #DreamPool is meant to be a goofy map-pool and it has more "standard" maps than last season had. It's a joke. I just want ~50% normal maps. A normal map shouldn't really favour any of the races. We know that such maps can exist because we've had them in the past. I don't want experimental maps. No 3P maps with massive positional imbalance and wonky rotation. No maps where the natural is more exposed to drops than it is to a frontal assault, making your main base as exposed as a natural normally would be. No maps where people can camp on four free bases for 20 minutes whilst tinkering with their super-army composition. More Overgrowth, more Bel'Shir Vestige, more fair and balanced maps. Less Blink maps. Less drop maps. Less over-sized maps. Less tiny maps. You can't have 7 standard maps because then every game would look the same, but 4 standard maps and 3 experimental ones (or vice-versa) would be fine: At least then people can veto the experimental ones if they turn out to be imbalanced, which last season's map pool showed us they often do. A map like Nimbus with a 35% win-rate for one race vs. another race shouldn't exist. Ever. Please, Pleeeeaaassseeee don't call that standard, the "standard" term you like to throw around is irrelevant to the amount of spawns a map has, and a map being standard is by no means an assurance that the map will end up being balanced. For the sake of the sanity of any mapmaker that dares try to talk to you, don't say "standard" when referring to 2p standard maps because as i said the standard term is irrelevant to the amount of spawns a map has, just say that you are in love of 2P standard maps and be done with it. I think you are exaggerating what he said. I think Sated is aware that a 3P map could be standard too and that there were some rather standard 4P maps around already. The point he is making is (I think) that the 3-4player maps we had all kind of played around having some wonky features on top of 3-4p maps already playing out a little wonky. (rotational imbalances, bigger size, early scouting issues) I can really connect to his commend. I'd love it if we just had a certain set of 3-4 good standard maps (make it old ones, I don't mind playing on Daybreak for the next 100years for as long as it is fun) and then 3-4 experimental ones. I don't see the point in making 5-6 of 7 maps semi-wonky when the balance for such features just isn't really there. I'd like a mappool like: 1) Current standard 2p map 2) Current standard >3p map 3) New map that looks very standard 4) Current map that plays differently and may have small imbalances 5) New map that looks like it will play out differently Then fill the last two spots with maps like these: *) New Blizzard map **) Community/Popularity Contest Winner ***) Nostalgia map *) Blizzard sometimes has interesting mapdesigns and though people might not like them as much, e.g. Alterzim produced some of the best PvZs we have ever seen. **) Many good maps result from those, for as long as we don't force each and every popularity contest winner into the mappool we have a good pool to choose from. ***) Many old maps were only retired because they were played so much. Having them return for a season gives many players good memories and isn't all that problematic because those have already been tested so much. He's not actually, he does not consider 3P standard maps to be Standard maps because his view on what standard means when talking about maps is skewed. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/470241-dreampool-finalised?page=4#76I fully agree with you that there needs to be a mix of standard maps, along with other maps that are less so, but that's not what i'm arguing here at all. Also i disagree with you Zeromuss on that standard changes over time, the standard is based mostly on the flow of the map more than a certain feature, a map with a gold base can be standard, a map that has a island base can be a standard map, a standard map means that the natural is can be walled off with ~3 3x3 buildings that are near the creep edge of a hatchery that's placed on the natural base, meanwhile the main base has a 1x sized ramp that leads to the natural and both base cores(mineral lines+vespene+townhalls) are around ~30 units of distance, meanwhile the third base(s) will find itself(s) at around ~40 units of distance from the natural base core, without falling onto a place that can be considered wide open, it will usually be bordering with the main base perimeter, and a highground/lowground will be in front of it to reduce the exposed area so it will be exposed only by ~two lanes, one of which can be used to park your army. Daybreak, CloudKingdom, Whirlwind, TDA, and Pantanal are all standard maps if you measure them with the same pole i just gave, Metalopolis could also be considered standardish if you alter the layout to correct the open natural because the distances between the bases correspond to those on a standard map. One of the issues we have on the community/mapmakers is are the terms we use, standard is one of them, and i consider it to be very important that such terms should be standardized as much as possible. Hm, I see. Personally I wouldn't call MGR too standard either due to the very open 3rd base and how it is quite different depending on whether you spawn clock- or counterclockwise. As you say, that comes down to standardization of terms. Personally I'm measuring how "standard" a map is by how much its features allow for standard gameplay without your opponent being able to blindcounter you. E.g. on MGR a commited timing against a standard timed Protoss 3rd should usually succeed when those builds collide blindly, not so much on Overgrowth or Frost cross positions. I'm open for that to change if someone would make a complete definition of "standard map". BigJ Post.
|
Foxtrot is definitely standard to my mind, it was one of my favorite maps on the last pool with Overgrowth. Which styles would you say are favored on it ?
|
Aggressive styles, but i wouldn't say that it really favors those styles, i would better word it as it hinders overly greedy gameplay.
|
On November 24 2014 05:17 [PkF] Wire wrote:I think the answer would involve the word blink.
Oh yeah forgot that one there.
|
One of the few things Blizzard is doing right was this idea.
|
On November 24 2014 06:07 swag_bro wrote: One of the few things Blizzard is doing right was this idea. But tournaments still uses old maps... Are u sure it was a.good idea?
|
Well, I see a lot of pro players complaining on twitter about this map pool (demuslim, targa, etc...) and I was wondering why the heck blizzard really wishes to continue this stuff until 5 Jan. Is anyone here on TL is actually having fun on the #dreampool or ... ?
|
|
I'm actually having a good time too though swarm hosts styles can be quite frustrating. But overall I'm enjoying the map pool. It's probably easier to enjoy the map pool as Protoss though.
|
On November 24 2014 06:11 SuperHofmann wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2014 06:07 swag_bro wrote: One of the few things Blizzard is doing right was this idea. But tournaments still uses old maps... Are u sure it was a.good idea?
It's good for shitty noobs like me who 4 gate, cannon rush and blink all in.
|
I think it was a good idea, right now the meta is stuck in the same "standard" patterns without much deviation, one of the reasons people dislike the map pool is because "balance", however what blizzard is doing really makes sense, in LotV they are going to be a lot of changes and of course people will jump to the balance part without addressing the dessing part much (people are already complaining about balance when LotV ISN'T EVEN BETA) so these maps will help people get used to the fact that the game is going to much more different and also not as balanced than what it is right now, in LotV you won't be able to 3 base turtle to 200 max in 18 minutes, much like you can't with most of these maps, so I think it was a good plan to help people get used to how things are going to be in the beta and also so they can discard they're notions of "standard" that in LotV won't mean shit.
Also I like the map pool is not bad to shake things up everyonce in a while
|
To be honest, I'm too low of level for the maps to make much of a difference. Some of the old maps are fun for nostalgias sake though, so that makes it worth it for me personally. I hope after this season we stick with a few more 'experimental' maps.
|
I'm enjoying the Dream pool, but it's unfortunate that they are still using the old maps for tournaments. Doesn't make much sense when the majority of the player base uses ladder as their primary practice.
Even as a casual player, when you see a pro use a strategy on a certain map, you draw inspiration from that and use it in your own play.
|
I'm enjoying the Dreampool quite a lot too. Especially how it promotes different qualities than the "regular" map pool. I mean you used to be able to do the same 3CC/double Ebay build in TvZ on all maps. And zergs knew how to play against it, so people played in a really similar way on all maps, since the builds worked more or less on all maps.
But now ? Please go try a 3CC double Ebay build in TvZ on metalo or XNC, I dare you :-p
Right now, I feel like the map pool rewards way more scouting, adaptation and improvisation rather than perfect build orders and optimisation. At least that's how I feel in TvZ and TvT. I don't feel like it affected TvP that much tho...
|
|
France9034 Posts
On November 24 2014 07:05 Twine wrote: Well, I see a lot of pro players complaining on twitter about this map pool (demuslim, targa, etc...) and I was wondering why the heck blizzard really wishes to continue this stuff until 5 Jan. Is anyone here on TL is actually having fun on the #dreampool or ... ?
I'm having fun with it.
Oh and by the way, the map pool can be fun to play and still problematic. The biggest issue for pros at the moment I think is that they can't really use the ladder to practice anything else than mechanics, because the maps aren't used in tournaments.
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On November 24 2014 09:14 Lexender wrote: I think it was a good idea, right now the meta is stuck in the same "standard" patterns without much deviation, one of the reasons people dislike the map pool is because "balance", however what blizzard is doing really makes sense, in LotV they are going to be a lot of changes and of course people will jump to the balance part without addressing the dessing part much (people are already complaining about balance when LotV ISN'T EVEN BETA) so these maps will help people get used to the fact that the game is going to much more different and also not as balanced than what it is right now, in LotV you won't be able to 3 base turtle to 200 max in 18 minutes, much like you can't with most of these maps, so I think it was a good plan to help people get used to how things are going to be in the beta and also so they can discard they're notions of "standard" that in LotV won't mean shit.
Also I like the map pool is not bad to shake things up everyonce in a while I don't think so. If you veto Metalopolis and XNC you receive pretty standard 3 base maps where you can turtle on 3 bases pretty good. I remember good portion of games with 3 bases and more on Akilon, Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak, Ohana and Shakuras. But on all the maps I named you can get to 3 bases pretty safe. The worst from the list is Daybreak, IMHO. I can never get 3rd properly against good zerg, the nexus placement always prevents me from defending the 3rd properly and it gets destroyed. DAMN IT ><
|
On November 24 2014 18:15 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2014 17:53 LoneYoShi wrote: I'm enjoying the Dreampool quite a lot too. Especially how it promotes different qualities than the "regular" map pool. I mean you used to be able to do the same 3CC/double Ebay build in TvZ on all maps. And zergs knew how to play against it, so people played in a really similar way on all maps, since the builds worked more or less on all maps.
But now ? Please go try a 3CC double Ebay build in TvZ on metalo or XNC, I dare you :-p
Right now, I feel like the map pool rewards way more scouting, adaptation and improvisation rather than perfect build orders and optimisation. At least that's how I feel in TvZ and TvT. I don't feel like it affected TvP that much tho... But there are perfect build orders on maps like XNC. People are just a little rusty with them. For example, I'm rediscovering my love for Robo-before-Nexus openings in PvT :3
Indeed, but a perfect build per map isn't the same as a perfect build for the whole map pool. It feels a lot more varied, and that's what's really enjoyable about that map pool IMHO. Maps were way too similar (and I suppose that if you veto XNC and Metalo, they still are to a certain extent...) Also, as you say, people are rusty, so you can make stuff work that shouldn't really be able to work :D
|
On November 24 2014 19:03 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2014 09:14 Lexender wrote: I think it was a good idea, right now the meta is stuck in the same "standard" patterns without much deviation, one of the reasons people dislike the map pool is because "balance", however what blizzard is doing really makes sense, in LotV they are going to be a lot of changes and of course people will jump to the balance part without addressing the dessing part much (people are already complaining about balance when LotV ISN'T EVEN BETA) so these maps will help people get used to the fact that the game is going to much more different and also not as balanced than what it is right now, in LotV you won't be able to 3 base turtle to 200 max in 18 minutes, much like you can't with most of these maps, so I think it was a good plan to help people get used to how things are going to be in the beta and also so they can discard they're notions of "standard" that in LotV won't mean shit.
Also I like the map pool is not bad to shake things up everyonce in a while I don't think so. If you veto Metalopolis and XNC you receive pretty standard 3 base maps where you can turtle on 3 bases pretty good. I remember good portion of games with 3 bases and more on Akilon, Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak, Ohana and Shakuras. But on all the maps I named you can get to 3 bases pretty safe. The worst from the list is Daybreak, IMHO. I can never get 3rd properly against good zerg, the nexus placement always prevents me from defending the 3rd properly and it gets destroyed. DAMN IT ><
Hm, might want to look into old Oz games if you have trouble taking a third on Daybreak. He played 1gate/3rd nexus (after FFE) back in WoL days on Daybreak before MsC and gateway expands. One of the first Protoss I remember doing the walled in canons as part of his build every game.
Edit: God damn it, even just finding any noname Vods from 2012 is hard... Might not be worth the time looking for them ^^
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
On November 24 2014 19:49 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2014 19:03 deacon.frost wrote:On November 24 2014 09:14 Lexender wrote: I think it was a good idea, right now the meta is stuck in the same "standard" patterns without much deviation, one of the reasons people dislike the map pool is because "balance", however what blizzard is doing really makes sense, in LotV they are going to be a lot of changes and of course people will jump to the balance part without addressing the dessing part much (people are already complaining about balance when LotV ISN'T EVEN BETA) so these maps will help people get used to the fact that the game is going to much more different and also not as balanced than what it is right now, in LotV you won't be able to 3 base turtle to 200 max in 18 minutes, much like you can't with most of these maps, so I think it was a good plan to help people get used to how things are going to be in the beta and also so they can discard they're notions of "standard" that in LotV won't mean shit.
Also I like the map pool is not bad to shake things up everyonce in a while I don't think so. If you veto Metalopolis and XNC you receive pretty standard 3 base maps where you can turtle on 3 bases pretty good. I remember good portion of games with 3 bases and more on Akilon, Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak, Ohana and Shakuras. But on all the maps I named you can get to 3 bases pretty safe. The worst from the list is Daybreak, IMHO. I can never get 3rd properly against good zerg, the nexus placement always prevents me from defending the 3rd properly and it gets destroyed. DAMN IT >< Hm, might want to look into old Oz games if you have trouble taking a third on Daybreak. He played 1gate/3rd nexus (after FFE) back in WoL days on Daybreak before MsC and gateway expands. One of the first Protoss I remember doing the walled in canons as part of his build every game. I will check it, thanks
|
|
|
|