[TSL] Candidate Map Pool - Page 7

---

On February 10 2011 06:03 setzer wrote:


That's your loss. 13 players from Asia are being invited and I would assume most of are already in GSL code S. Then you have some of the foreigners that are in Code A (ret, huk) that could potentially also be in TSL3, so it simply makes sense to include GSL maps when a lot of the TSL3 players are in GSL.

That said it is unfortunate the map pool is final. I strongly believe Testbug is one of, if not the, best map out there. And with the constant iccup tournaments, showmatches and map promotions I think it's safe to say their maps have undergone the same level of balance testing the GSL maps have.

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:01 Wolf wrote:


iCCup maps haven't had as much extensive testing. They're great maps when you look at them, and they're made by some of the best mapmakers in the world (if not the best), but then once they're made, they kinda sit in a hub (which here happens to be the custom maps thread) for a while before tournaments just decide to pick them up based on how they look and some random here and there testing of high level gamers. Then they're used in fairly small scale tournaments and become more popular that way (although this is fairly recent).

The GSL maps were made by mapmakers that are in a clan with professional gamers testing them constantly. The mapmakers for most of the new GSL maps were Prime members, and the others of course were made by Blizzard (and slightly modified by mapmaking teams). They've just had more extensive testing overall to make sure they were ready for the biggest SC2 league that currently exists. Tested by paid professionals. And now they're being used in a tournament (just ONE tournament), that has more spectators worldwide than any other, and is widely considered the most prestigious.

On a side note, I like most iCCup maps more than the Prime-made maps.. I'm just trying to give objective points!

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:04 GHOSTCLAW wrote:


I guess i'm not arguing that the iccup maps shouldn't be used, it's that the GSL maps are an easier call to make and defend. The Iccup maps are great, and tested in weekly casted matches that aren't as well covered as the GSL.

With that in mind, the size of the TSL, and the type of exposure it receives in korea (TSL 1 and TSL 2 were good, therefore TSL 3 will probably receive exposure on fomos and other forums as well), reinforces the argument about backlash and having GSL maps included. This time around, it's a worldwide pool that includes koreans, and many other people around the world. In addition "what happens if the gsl maps suck?" - the answer is that it goes back to GomTV. Also, this is a preliminary map list, but the point still stands, the TSL won't need to worry about it as much as if they used iccup maps. (Again, the argument is about why GSL maps are easier to defend as a choice if you're going to pick four new maps). Finally, the players will need to learn the GSL maps anyway (as they will be used next season), whereas it is unclear if the iccup maps will be used in a tournament as large as the GSL.

I understand that for the iccup maps to be used in larger tournaments, the maps should be used in the TSL as a stepping stone to acceptance into korean tournaments. I suppose that the teamliquid staff running TSL disagrees (I haven't done anything at all for TSL as far as I know), for all the reasons that I've mentioned.

As for the spectators and the maps, I strongly disagree on a personal level - I got into starcraft:bw because my friends played and followed progaming; when i started playing on the newer maps it was quite difficult to understand all the nuances of the new maps, and how they affected gameplay (6/5/4 fact push TvP to punish various third timings, dt/sair vs reaver/sair, etc.) This leads me to believe that understanding the maps is going to mean different things to different spectators, and the more widely known the maps are, the more people will feel that they get out of watching the TSL.

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:07 Ironical wrote:
Crossfire SE is a million times worse than Scrap Station ever was.

The main problem with it is that there are just so many ramps that allow anyone to easily split the map by setting up an almost impenetrable defensive position, not to mention literally every area in the map can be walled off with no more than three force fields. It sets up a whole number of balance problems that will limit numbers of options Terran and Protoss can go for while almost automatically killing Zerg - I haven't even touched on the fact that the third is so far away from the natural.

I'm a Protoss player and it's easy to see how easily Colossi would dominate on this map if one simply plays defensively on Sentry based play.

I don't have many complaints about the other maps, though. Scrap Station isn't great but I'd take it over Crossfire any day.

---

---

On February 10 2011 05:38 CTStalker wrote:
I'm surprised people are asking for crossfire to be removed. I haven't seen any GSL games on it, but I've played on it a few times and it's a lot of fun (chill pointed out it's basically a knock off of http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/korean/maps/6_Sin_Peaks_of_Baekdu )

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:22 Kennigit wrote:
These are the maps that have been chosen. If you want to talk about other potential maps, please do it outside of this thread.

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:33 Frankon wrote:

The thread name is candidate map pool... Talking about ups and downs of the maps and what maps should be in or be replaced should be done in this thread.

---

---

On February 10 2011 06:32 TaKemE wrote:


You clearly havent played Crossfire SE, yes most of the places on the map can be walled of with 2-3 FF's but the map is made so its very easy to come with an army from more then one side. The only place one the map that is very hard to attack a protoss army is where there are 2 ramps to a high ground but there is no reson you should attack a protoss there as zerg since they cant hit any base from there.

---