BWMN Time

07/01/2025

06:30

Map Access

Forum - main

Guide to mapping page: 1 2
starparty	"I've always seen myself as some kind of midunderstood revolutionary as far as mapping goes :D" Well, you are aware that you are continuously preaching the opposite to revolution, right? :)
2009, 08, 10 05:49
Nightmarjoo	?
2009, 08, 10 09:29
spinesheath	"lol, well maybe they're wrong." Same to you, man, seriously. I do agree that it isn't always vey pretty or good style to waste space. But that's about all there is to say about that issue. There ARE 2 player concepts that fill whole 128x128 maps, and if a map meets all the requirements like spacing, path length and so on, but just happens to not fit into a smaller mapsize without making the map worse then so be it. "However it has a large flaw from the gaming perspective, it's annoying to play, it's too different from the standard, comfortable model to play." "I've always seen myself as some kind of midunderstood revolutionary as far as mapping goes :D" I think you contradict yourself there a bit. Mapping goes hand in hand with playing, that should be obvious. The map dictates the game to a great degree (at least on B+ to pro). So by making revolutionary maps, you force players to play somewhat revolutinary. If you want to create a revolutionary map you want to create a map that plays out differently. If you create a "revolutionary" map but it plays just like any other map, it isn't revolutionary. Yep I know I spelled that word out many times. If you doubt that reasoning: Korean pro mappers have to create maps that leac to intersting games so that people keep watching SC. Money makes the world go round... So obviously they want revolutionary games because always the same thing is kind of boring. That's why they made maps like Arkanoid, DMZ, Demons Forest. Peaks, That-3-Playeer-Lurker-Egg-Map, Troy, and so on. The problem with those maps is either imbalance or, if they are balanced, that those maps tend to have a few very specific strategies that have to be used. While those strategies are different from what you see on other maps, they still are pretty much the same every game on those maps. So those maps don't survive very long. BUT they are revolutionary. :p Conclusion: You are magnifying the importance of that wasted space thing. While it's a good idea not to waste stuff in general, it should be accepted if the result is decent or even amazing otherwise.
2009, 08, 10 17:44
Nightmarjoo	I was joking, but by "revolutionary" wasn't talking about a "revolutionary map", but looking at maps and mapping in "revolutionary ways". I stand by the wasted space thing completely. All my evidence for it comes from both my playing experience and from looking at pro maps. Modern pro maps don't waste space, so it makes no sense that any other map made for competetive melee gaming should waste space. (2)128x128 maps can make great pictures, but they're awful to play on, I dunno how many times I have to say this. I'm saying it based on my experience of playing (2)128x128 maps, and see what others have thought about them, and making conclusions based on statistics and my own reasoning. I don't see how it's an exageration to say a map without wasting space is better than the same map made with slightly poorer execution resulting in wasted space. There aren't amazing maps with wasted space, decent sure, but these decent maps could be better without the space wasting.
2009, 08, 11 21:51
spinesheath	Just because all good maps don't waste space it doesn't mean that a map can only be good if it doesn't waste space. If A induces B, B doesn't necessarily induce A. Also, you shouldn't try not to waste space just because pro maps don't. If you follow that logic, you will not come up with new maps because you always have to copy pro maps. Or you selectively apply that logic to a random attribute of a map, which doesn't make sense either. (2)128x128 maps don't have to play out terribly. Just take the "remove 2 starting locations from a 4 player map"-map. The missing scouting luck doesn't have any deep impact into gameplay. The fixed distances make some matchups more stable and the simpler scouting pattern makes a few proxies invalid, but creates new ones. The map may look kind of stupid on the paper with those ridiculously huge expansions, but it has been proven that it works. Also, Destination on a 128x128 map with water at the sides will make air play stronger and might have to be rebalanced somehow, but it still would be a decent map. Ugly on the pic, but certainly not a terrible map just because 50% of the map is wtaer. You also fail to acknowledge that what you call wasted space can be an important strategic feature. It can serve as a safe path for a dropship or if it is buildable as a place to put proxies/hidden tech. I don't see how using the wasted space in a decent map with wasted space could make the map better. It could just as well get worse. Enlarging ares can strengthen some races and weaken others. Changing the layout could totally throw off balance. And I fail to see why only concepts that happen to be balanced if fit tightly into a rectangle are good maps.
2009, 08, 12 20:05
Nightmarjoo	If it could be useful as an air path or for proxy tech, it isn't wasted. For example the area behind the nat in Spinel Valley III, or the broken cliff behind the mains of Colosseum2. Obviously if you remove 2 starting locations from a 4 player map it's going to be playable and likely just as balanced as the first map, but I'm not talking about playable. Anyone can make a playable map. I'm talking about perfecting a map concept, making a map as good as it possibly could be. Following that "rule" the new (2)128x128 map would fail to be a perfected concept because of the odd distances and wasted space (the mains). You could take the underlying concept of the newly created (2)map and remake it with a 96 dimension without wasting space and it would be better imo since it would be completely designed for (2)action. A map can waste space and be fine, but I'm saying virtually the same map that doesn't waste space is better, so long as distances, sizes, proportions are fine. I don't care about "ok" maps, "passable" maps, I'm saying you don't see promaps with wasted space because they're making the maps the best they can. Anything less can still create a good map, but not the best that it could be, and it's the best imo that mappers should strive for.
2009, 08, 12 22:42
Sleddog	"it would be better imo" Imo is the key here... I understand your position on it, but putting an opinion that is (seemingly) part of the minority in a guide meant for general map making doesn't make sense. To me it's like writing a guide on drinking and saying never to drink cheap beer under any circumstances lol.
2009, 08, 12 23:00
Starparty	on nmjs defense you shouldnt ever drink cheap beer :P
2009, 08, 12 23:12
Sleddog	LOL
2009, 08, 12 23:15
Nightmarjoo	Thank you Starparty. Well seeing as how it's my guide I fail to see why it shouldn't include my take, my opinions. That tends to be the point of writing a paper or book etc on anything. There's like no place in writing where the author is entirely seperate from what he's writing.
2009, 08, 12 23:39
Sleddog	Well of course, but normal opinion pieces would be "4 expos per player" and "at least 1 min only" etc (I'm recalling from memory...). Something like never make a (2)128x128 is a major paradigm shift and would best be in it's own article, fully outlining your reasons why. Actually I would recommend just that. ;)
2009, 08, 12 23:59
Nightmarjoo	lol, well writing it in the guide was my way of doing that, I hadn't felt like writing up a thing on just it, and had I not wrote the guide likely would never have written anything about it, just have told people not to make (2)128x128 maps.
2009, 08, 13 00:41
spinesheath	Well, so I guess I now understand your reasoning. To me it doesn't sound like you have problems with wasted space for balance or gameplay reasons, but entirely because it is imperfect in your eyes. I can accept that very well, but then you should not look down upon maps that don't meet that criterium so harshly. If that is not how you think, we should probably stop this discussion because basically everything that can be said has been said. We wouldn't get anywhere. BUt even then you should criticize such maps so much because you can see very well that you are pretty much alone with your point of view. And if you claim that there is no way you could be wrong I'll probably lose all my respect for you. About mentioning wasted space in your guide like that: You wrote a damn long guide, that covers a lot of stuff. New mappers that happen to stumble accross that guide might follow your guide and probably will do well. They most likely won't need other resources because your guide is pretty exhaustive. So they won't even hear any arguments against that wasted space issue (and to be honest, a map that doesn't waste space isn't a bad map because of that). You are pretty much making people share your view on that issue. I have the feeling that you like the power you have over the foreign mapping community, so that might not be unwanted by you. But imo there are enough monopolys in the internet already, I don't need any more. Also don't forget that people who follow your opinion on that aspect will never be able to come up with a (2)128x128 map just because you say it is wrong. Even if they had a great concept. You are limiting creativity. Btw, don't draw the conclusion that I don't like or respect you just because I am judging you quite harshly here. Right now that is not the case. modified by spinesheath
2009, 08, 13 10:50
Nightmarjoo	If you didn't like me you wouldn't waste your time telling me I'm an idiot. Grief and his pals hate me, and you don't see a single one in this thread.
2009, 08, 13 21:25
Starparty	This is more an argument about proving nmj wrong, rather than arguing wether the 2player map size is valid or not. Myself, i wouldnt condemt a map just because of those criteria, but then what the hell do i know these days, i play 3v3 vanilla hunters with 80 eapm. Nmj did a nice guide that won a price because people liked it. That's all there is to it, and a sincere congrats for that joel. Good job!
2009, 08, 13 23:23
	page: 1 2

Reply:

You have to be logged in to post