| BWMN Time |
| 02/22/2026 |
| 00:44 |
| News |
| new account |
| list users |
| Login: |
| Replays |
| Map DB |
| ICCup |
| Map Access |
| New map |
| Edit map |
 |
Forum - feedback
Hmm page: 1 | ||
| Actually, it looks a bit retareded to say this, but i want to keep the quality on this page as high as possible. I think beloved land is a good map, and Nastys Improvements are obvius so it's good to have him a MOTW, no question about that. Still i think, and if i read through the small amount of comments, that there would have been a better or at least obviously more balanced MOTW. Just to make sure, this has nothing to do with NMs mapmalking skill nor the map itself, just with the decision process itself. New and fresh is good, as long as it is good implemented. If the distance between the horizontal bases would have been shorter, which is still changeable btw, the decision as motw would be ok. But now a rush is _way_ to powerfull imo. Don't you think so? So, i don't want to argue about that map in particular, but why is a map that seems not as balanced as others motw? :/ | ||
| 2006, 05, 17 23:09 | ||
| Well when we pick these maps, did we use the 3 point system where 1st gets 3 pts, 2nd gets 2 pts, and 3rd gets 1 pt? Because I can't think of any other more fair way to do this. | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 05:32 | ||
| People orgasm when they see new, fresh, semi-experiemntal maps. Nasty's map is all of those things, so it was chosen. | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 06:30 | ||
| Well it looks ok, but gameplay wise - there isnt much new. I do not agree with Listoric that balancing is most important, with so many motw, one can be favoring terran while other is P-favoring, it balances out. On the other hand, if every motw looks like any other motw, then it really becomes boring. Problem is, there isnt any testing anymore. So we just pick beautiful jpg images. There are no obs versions anymore and ppl even may have big bugs or trigger problems in their maps and we don't realize it. | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 10:16 | ||
| @MA fair way sound good, but obviously noone has a problem with the awesomely short distance between horizontal bases here, e.g. Imo this is really imbalanced. It`s just, i don't feel happy with the "voting" of the last weeks somehow. Luckily most maps are great anyway, so it doesn't make a big difference, even if i think that we could have pushed some even better maps. Well, maybe it`s just me... | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 12:19 | ||
| "People orgasm when they see new, fresh, semi-experiemntal maps. Nasty's map is all of those things, so it was chosen." there were several other maps that offered much better concepts in a better executed manner. lemuria devil is a dynamic and interesting map, as is raptor. raptor earned the same amount of votes as beloved land. | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 12:51 | ||
| i have too agree to lis. my deliberations about mapcomments, pool of maps and the voting were actually almost the same. i just kept back a bit cuase i had enough flaming lately, and i usually only flame for fun. | ||
| 2006, 05, 18 13:21 | ||
| anyone can sit down and make a map with the same balance as an existing good map. there's no point in making a map with pre-existing balance except to make it prettier. therefore, "balance first" is wrong because a map with only good balance should not even be a map, as it is just a copy of another map. so we look for games that add somethin to an existing formula, or dare to try to find a new one. obviously we only like such attempts if we think they are just as playable for everyone as the established balances are. therefore, a MOTW should be something new and fresh FIRST, and then the best balance out of all of those. and i don't want to see a rep of listoric vs starparty to tell me a map is balanced. give me a fucking break. get good players from teamliquid to at least give a map the okay before pretending "it's balanced" because "you tested it." | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 01:19 | ||
| you shouldn't be making maps unless you have an actual group of players who cannot simply be beaten down by a D player's APM. they should play the nominees regularly, a certain amount of games, probably over the course of a month or more. that means MOTW is a bad idea--too fast. think of the MOTW's as nominees. that works fine then. the next step is to have players, and to give them a month to go over the past N MOTW's that haven't been chosen by them yet. after a month of this, those players could come to a consensus on a "map of the month." so you can leave your MOTW intact, as a nomination/screening process. | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 01:21 | ||
| Normally i'm not that lazy, but i just want to tell you that your post was a good laugh, and use the edit function next time. Thx :) | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 17:26 | ||
player skill means nothing. Honestly, most good players just click faster, they dont even know the game better than me or listoric or whatever. And we can very well test gameplay, testing balance is harder but not the main issue. At least playability can very well be tested by chobo players. Players are encouraged to play and test maps. Even good ones. But I won`t pay them money, and thats about the only way to motivate them to play other maps than the ones that are already widely known. So I prefer Listoric vs Starparty over no games at all. | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 18:07 | ||
modified by lnept | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 21:09 | ||
| all the things mentioned in this thread are things i have brought up in the past and people brushed them away, so why should they be important now? | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 21:11 | ||
| After seeing how much people liked Chameleon despite the pretty obvious imbalances, I'm trying to push more experimental maps. They may not be as balanced, but they definitely get noticed and played a lot more. | ||
| 2006, 05, 19 22:47 | ||
| i cant say much.. im jus happy i recieved motw.. on another note: changes will be made wen proven necessary. so far i havent seen a game in horizontal positions (other than epidion's) to prove that those distances ruin game play. of course that those distances are short and it cuts strategies in half but why cant a map implement cheese or shorten a game b/c of player positions? If anything these types of games will show that there are funner ways to play a map. imba of course is a big concern here but where is there imba in these distances? all races have a fair shot if they change their strategies into unconventional tactics... which imo is what an experimental map should be. creating unique ways to play it.. and how often will these distances occur? 1/3 times.. which keeps players on their toes but still 2/3 for 'regular' game play. | ||
| 2006, 05, 20 00:40 | ||
| bunker rush... zealot rush... 4 pool... 6 pool... i guess i could name more .,, | ||
| 2006, 05, 20 03:15 | ||
| btw, most people i talked to were like "chameleon? one time, never again" | ||
| 2006, 05, 20 10:28 | ||
| I agree, a lot of people don't like it now, but when the original thread was out, a lot of people liked Chameleon. It got played, that's what it has to do. Also, in regards to close positions on BL... koreans are trying to get away from macro maps and more into micro maps, like Baek Do-Dae-Gan. I'd say that the close positions doesn't completely ruin the map, and it might encourage more of a micro game. | ||
| 2006, 05, 20 21:49 | ||
| i think chameleon has been played enough. this "mots" thing lasts a little too long, i think... maybe they should elect one per half season. | ||
| 2006, 05, 21 02:50 | ||
| Yea they should, especially since if that map isn't as popular as past MotS maps. When I looked at the ladder for 1v1, most of the top players didn't even touch chameleon, they even played sattarchasm more often. | ||
| 2006, 05, 29 20:29 | ||
| page: 1 | ||
Reply:
You have to be logged in to post
 |