[$100 Prize Pool] Melee Mapping Contest - Poll

[Chaosy]

I just saw a bunch of drama at the first page or so.

 

[RED BARON]

Okay, so finally done with what I mentioned in my last comment (see when I did posted it, substract 5 hours and you have my time spent on this Things you do when you really should be doing something else).

And holy hell, there was a lot of maps here. Anyway on to my comments and finally who I'll vote for. My vote will be based not just on if its a good melee map, but also if I see it working well in a comp setting where others have to find it interesting to watch it, how well done the terrain was and so forth.

I playtested all of the maps against hard AI, with random for both races. I have not looked at the maps in the editor thus solely commenting from play experience. I also switched between starting locations to try both. I have made a mention of lacking correct name even if wc3 does mention amount of players, as it does make it easier to seperate between map types. I have only written map name, and not creator name, hope its understandable nonetheless. (Also one of the maps, dunno which one or if more than one, causes a folder duplication glitch in wc3).

--------------------------- Wall of text remarks ---------------------------

Iceberg Throne: Name missing classic format. The terrain layout does not appear balanced. Units do not utilize the cave shortcut. Neutral hostile units placed too close to player spawn. Variations in terrain size, also gives the bottom player a height advantage for the cave area with buildable terrain.

(2)FlameWars: Feels like a good solid melee map. A tiny misplacement of the tavern ensures that it is not perfectly center. The same goes for wood resources not being perfectly split even.

(2)Swamped Temple: I like the small story elements placed around the map (mostly kobolds with bombs near waterfall/dam), and the way it goes for an asymmetrical symmetry. Overall it feels somewhat balanced.

Blizz City: Name not using correct format. Goes for a classic style, but is not symmetrical and thus not equally balanced for both players.

Coral Reef: Name not using correct format. It has an interesting layout that looks really good on the mini-map. There is some problems with the amounts of tree's available for the players, as they aren't equal. However overall it feels fair.

Crown of Thorns: Name not using correct format. Interesting decision to cut off the corners, however the arrow like structure for gold mine placement doesn't really make it look appealing and especially for the shops in the bottom it doesn't facilitate gameplay properly. There is also some issues with the amount of trees available for each side.

Emerald Nightmare: Name not using correct format. I really like the look of the terrain, it feels different and vibrant. There is good symmetry and it felt good to play on. My only real complaint is that the rocks "guarding" the backdoor which allows for a clever roundabout tactics or similar, doesn't fit that well into the overall terrain.

Endgame in the Nether World: Name not using correct format. An interesting world, with properly working way-gates. It has interesting hard to get gold mines, but terrain size is not equal for the areas which can cause problems. Overall I enjoyed playing it.

Fields of Ruin: Name not using correct format. There is a good in here with the island goldmine, and potentially more easily defendable bottom mines. However the map does suffer from not being equal in its parts. More terrain for one side, more trees for one side and things a slightly skewered towards the top player. I enjoyed the tactical goldmine placements. There is an odd thing going on with item drops - I almost only got circlet of nobility from drops, which makes me wonder if there is a problem with the item table.

Fractured Monarch: Name not using correct format. I am glad to see a marketplace in here for the first time, and properly out of the way. However the rebirth rune for the spiders seem a bit extreme, as they are tough units, with a chaos attack - even if I get the theme. The map is not perfectly symmetrical, and some sides do have more access to trees. However that is primarily a problem with the already hard to get gold mines in top. Other than that it starts out well, with the forced spreading outside of initial starting area. Unit path-finding and AI do struggle a little with the corners that are only made up of raised terrain and rock doodad (e.g merch camp area).

Gilneas in Winter: Name not using correct format. Nice looking map from the top view. I always love when the starting area is a platform, allowing for defined borders and a more defendable position. The layout is not symmetrical, and there are clear variations of the choke-holds (bottom for instance with the bridge), however I can't judge who has the most advantage here. Another thing I enjoyed is how the map facilities various strategies, be it backdoor with flying units over the otherwise blocked side, going up ramps or sacrificing to get the far away goldmine. It also didn't just dump a lot of trees near player spawn, as to not worry about that problem, which again might lead to some fights over resources. Would have loved to see a goblin shop as well, just for some more backdoor options. This feels like it could make for an enjoyable watch for a comp game.

Irresistible Mind: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). Unlike some of the previous maps, I don't see much connection between the story for the map and the map itself. The very open area towards your opponent with water limits potential tactics. The rocks around the gold mine feels out of place and are just an unnecessary annoyance. It plays okay, even if things are not 100% symmetrical.

Living Woods: Name not using correct format. A nice well balanced melee map. The overall presentation, the terrain and the fountain all adds to the calm atmosphere and it feels good to play on. I do lack the store, but that is a personal preference. It is simple setup and I do don't get the feeling of it facilitating that many varied tactics, but its a good solid map.

Outskirts Stroll: Name not using correct format. An odd map description not fitting with wc3 lore, but slightly humorous. Overall layout looks like it could fit 6 players if it was a bigger map. Works well and feels balanced. Very similar to original wc3 melee maps in style.

Pillars of Honor: Name not using correct format. The straight lines is very much appreciated at this point of testing, its makes for a good variation and there is also my beloved high-ground to create a defendable position (and creates the usual defense contra space problem). The amount of books of the dead is funny and fitting + everything is well placed. My most nagging issue was that the yellow grass around center objects concealed cliffs and thus couldn't be entered, though one would instinctively assume it possible. I liked it.

Pirate Coasts: Name not using correct format. First thing I notice, its a pirate theme, and yet no boat shop? With all the water it feels like a missed opportunity for variety. A decent melee map, although there is some slight errors with the symmetry, mostly in the bottom and distance from merc camp for top player.

River Valley: Name not using correct format. Overall its nice to have a map which is clearly separated into two, however there is a few things that causes problems. The way-points are broken, as in you cannot use one of them due to water depth, while the other only allows entry from one specific side. I am glad to see the inclusion of shipyards, however a transport ship doesn't really make much difference and thus the shop becomes sadly pointless. Otherwise its a decent melee map, even if the potential it had for varied tactics is somewhat lost.

Sigilo: Name not using correct format. Right of the bat the map preview promises an intriguing layout. When playing it and realizing the complex interaction of the way gates and the options for attack, I came to believe the first impression from the mini-map was true, as this is a different type of melee map. It goes outside the formula and it could lead to some very interesting matches, more so when both teams attack through the way-gates and meet in the cramped hallway. Pocket gold mine and the defense options are also very appreciated. The way almost a quarter of the map doesn't allow for ground troops can make for some good air fights as well. Slightly sad that the large hydra didn't drop anything, when you can get a skillbook from a murloc right next to it. Perhaps it could have guarded a goblin shop to allow for drop tactics. AI player does not seem to be able to do proper path-finding on the map, which is a minus. Not your usual melee map.

Taiga's Hegemony: Name not using correct format. The map description is missing text. The gold mine in the center is not actually in the center, and overall the map is not fully symmetrical, most notable around the center area. For the gold mine in the center to be the focal point mentioned in the map description I am also missing some motivation for it (3k gold extra isn't enough).

Thawing Snow: Name not using correct format. A good looking mini-map layout, makes this look promising. I am so glad to finally see water utilized correctly, with boats having a meaning and yet at the same time the map also logically allows for ground movement. Very well done and the added touch of the watcher rune to those that brave the creeps in the center is great. Some effort truly went into the terrain and yet manages to keep things simple, easy to understand and practical. Same goes for placement and choice of creeps. Overall this is a beautiful map and a great melee map as well with symmetry done right.

The Etherium: Name not using correct format. The map preview shows a something different and entering the map only confirms this. Its truly a stunning terrain. Trees around spawn isn't overdone and everything just looks amazing. There is some slight asymmetry, but nothing that ruins balance. AI players does struggle slightly with the bridges, but are able to use them. The extra gold mines and differences in protection is a bonus on an already well crafted map that truly stands out. The bridges allows for defensive strategies and overall I can see various tactics being deployed to secure victory. I liked it a lot.

The Forgotten Realm: Name not using correct format. A good solid melee map, with well done terrain matching the same theme of poison and decay. Most creeps fit with this theme. Everything appear symmetrical and is overall a good map. Would have liked a map description though.

Valley of Skulls: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). Plus points for including a quote by my favorite orc of all time. Good looking melee map, in the classic way, although the height difference does make it somewhat of its own, with the defensive ramp and almost pocket expansion. Not bad, though not enough skulls .

Violet Outpost: Name not using correct format. Very fitting terrain matching the expected look from the map description and fits right in with the original wc3 maps. I would have liked to see only wizards/humans inside the fort itself and not trolls, just as rock golems are a bit odd choice as well (going by theme and area), but otherwise a well done symmetrical classic melee map.

Warrior Shrine: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). The map description makes mention of just one shrine, but the map doesn't support it. and from both playing and layout it feels much more as two shrines competing against each other, separated by a small mote (side note: the placement of the same doodad is overdone around the tavern). With that exception it looks good, the height of the player spawn with its several key entry-points make for some engaging tactical maneuvering and the waypoints just add to the options. Quite good.

Waterfalls: Name not using correct format. Its immediately obvious that the map is not symmetrical with the bottom player being noticeably closer to shops. Having the tavern inside the spawn area is a difference with potential (but not typical melee maps). The waterfalls are well done and give a good sense of depth to the map, but the shop area with the doomguards feels weak and I would have preferred to see the theme for the creeps kept and the doomguard avoided. The darn monster doesn't fit well with most terrain.

Forsaken Trinity: Name not using correct format, and unlike all the other maps allow for 3 player instead of 2. The layout looks and feel familiar, but it is symmetrical and have a nice appearance to it. The positioning of the gold mines works great to create conflict and the hard choice between them is appreciated. More so with the island gold mines that require the use of the goblin shop and the defeat of a lvl 10 dragon (that sadly doesn't really drop anything good). I enjoyed the change of pace with 3 players instead of 2, and given that it manages to balance the 3 players and the available resources I am impressed, even if it uses a seen before layout. Still the contest was a 1vs1 map.

(4)Temple Field: Another varied amount of players, this time allowing for 2vs2 or up to 4 players. 1vs1 is also suggested and with the layout its possible as well. The marketplace returns to my joy, however given the location of it, it becomes a comparison with the goblin shop and as such there is a slight symmetry issue. It works well as a 4 player map, and had fun with it (going slightly overboard as it was the last map to test). This skates around the issue with not being 1vs1 map, as it can be done - still not really what the contest asked for.

---------------------- Great work everyone --------------------------

Out of all of them, those that most impressed me was:
Thawing Snow by Knecht
The Etherium by Erkan
Gilneas in Winter by ny RFWH

Its tough to decide between them, so I am glad that we are allowed 5 votes (although I believe 3 would be more balanced). As such I am voting for those I've listed just above + an extra vote on: Living Woods - by Blood Raven for being the most relaxing and in some ways good classic melee maps out of those I played.

With an honorable mention of the "red" Emerald Nightmare by Maxwell (Emeralds tend to be green btw ) - I did miss my vote on this map, but seeing how the results are it likely doesn't matter much.

EDIT: Realising that my moronic tireness had caused me to write review in the intro - thus changed.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Okay, so finally done with what I mentioned in my last comment (see when I did posted it, substract 5 hours and you have my time spent on this Things you do when you really should be doing something else).

And holy hell, there was a lot of maps here. Anyway on to my comments and finally who I'll vote for. My vote will be based not just on if its a good melee map, but also if I see it working well in a comp setting where others have to find it interesting to watch it, how well done the terrain was and so forth.

I playtested all of the maps against hard AI, with random for both races. I have not looked at the maps in the editor thus solely commenting from play experience. I also switched between starting locations to try both. I have made a mention of lacking correct name even if wc3 does mention amount of players, as it does make it easier to seperate between map types. I have only written map name, and not creator name, hope its understandable nonetheless. (Also one of the maps, dunno which one or if more than one, causes a folder duplication glitch in wc3).

--------------------------- Wall of text review ---------------------------

Iceberg Throne: Name missing classic format. The terrain layout does not appear balanced. Units do not utilize the cave shortcut. Neutral hostile units placed too close to player spawn. Variations in terrain size, also gives the bottom player a height advantage for the cave area with buildable terrain.

(2)FlameWars: Feels like a good solid melee map. A tiny misplacement of the tavern ensures that it is not perfectly center. The same goes for wood resources not being perfectly split even.

(2)Swamped Temple: I like the small story elements placed around the map (mostly kobolds with bombs near waterfall/dam), and the way it goes for an asymmetrical symmetry. Overall it feels somewhat balanced.

Blizz City: Name not using correct format. Goes for a classic style, but is not symmetrical and thus not equally balanced for both players.

Coral Reef: Name not using correct format. It has an interesting layout that looks really good on the mini-map. There is some problems with the amounts of tree's available for the players, as they aren't equal. However overall it feels fair.

Crown of Thorns: Name not using correct format. Interesting decision to cut off the corners, however the arrow like structure for gold mine placement doesn't really make it look appealing and especially for the shops in the bottom it doesn't facilitate gameplay properly. There is also some issues with the amount of trees available for each side.

Emerald Nightmare: Name not using correct format. I really like the look of the terrain, it feels different and vibrant. There is good symmetry and it felt good to play on. My only real complaint is that the rocks "guarding" the backdoor which allows for a clever roundabout tactics or similar, doesn't fit that well into the overall terrain.

Endgame in the Nether World: Name not using correct format. An interesting world, with properly working way-gates. It has interesting hard to get gold mines, but terrain size is not equal for the areas which can cause problems. Overall I enjoyed playing it.

Fields of Ruin: Name not using correct format. There is a good in here with the island goldmine, and potentially more easily defendable bottom mines. However the map does suffer from not being equal in its parts. More terrain for one side, more trees for one side and things a slightly skewered towards the top player. I enjoyed the tactical goldmine placements. There is an odd thing going on with item drops - I almost only got circlet of nobility from drops, which makes me wonder if there is a problem with the item table.

Fractured Monarch: Name not using correct format. I am glad to see a marketplace in here for the first time, and properly out of the way. However the rebirth rune for the spiders seem a bit extreme, as they are tough units, with a chaos attack - even if I get the theme. The map is not perfectly symmetrical, and some sides do have more access to trees. However that is primarily a problem with the already hard to get gold mines in top. Other than that it starts out well, with the forced spreading outside of initial starting area. Unit path-finding and AI do struggle a little with the corners that are only made up of raised terrain and rock doodad (e.g merch camp area).

Gilneas in Winter: Name not using correct format. Nice looking map from the top view. I always love when the starting area is a platform, allowing for defined borders and a more defendable position. The layout is not symmetrical, and there are clear variations of the choke-holds (bottom for instance with the bridge), however I can't judge who has the most advantage here. Another thing I enjoyed is how the map facilities various strategies, be it backdoor with flying units over the otherwise blocked side, going up ramps or sacrificing to get the far away goldmine. It also didn't just dump a lot of trees near player spawn, as to not worry about that problem, which again might lead to some fights over resources. Would have loved to see a goblin shop as well, just for some more backdoor options. This feels like it could make for an enjoyable watch for a comp game.

Irresistible Mind: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). Unlike some of the previous maps, I don't see much connection between the story for the map and the map itself. The very open area towards your opponent with water limits potential tactics. The rocks around the gold mine feels out of place and are just an unnecessary annoyance. It plays okay, even if things are not 100% symmetrical.

Living Woods: Name not using correct format. A nice well balanced melee map. The overall presentation, the terrain and the fountain all adds to the calm atmosphere and it feels good to play on. I do lack the store, but that is a personal preference. It is simple setup and I do don't get the feeling of it facilitating that many varied tactics, but its a good solid map.

Outskirts Stroll: Name not using correct format. An odd map description not fitting with wc3 lore, but slightly humorous. Overall layout looks like it could fit 6 players if it was a bigger map. Works well and feels balanced. Very similar to original wc3 melee maps in style.

Pillars of Honor: Name not using correct format. The straight lines is very much appreciated at this point of testing, its makes for a good variation and there is also my beloved high-ground to create a defendable position (and creates the usual defense contra space problem). The amount of books of the dead is funny and fitting + everything is well placed. My most nagging issue was that the yellow grass around center objects concealed cliffs and thus couldn't be entered, though one would instinctively assume it possible. I liked it.

Pirate Coasts: Name not using correct format. First thing I notice, its a pirate theme, and yet no boat shop? With all the water it feels like a missed opportunity for variety. A decent melee map, although there is some slight errors with the symmetry, mostly in the bottom and distance from merc camp for top player.

River Valley: Name not using correct format. Overall its nice to have a map which is clearly separated into two, however there is a few things that causes problems. The way-points are broken, as in you cannot use one of them due to water depth, while the other only allows entry from one specific side. I am glad to see the inclusion of shipyards, however a transport ship doesn't really make much difference and thus the shop becomes sadly pointless. Otherwise its a decent melee map, even if the potential it had for varied tactics is somewhat lost.

Sigilo: Name not using correct format. Right of the bat the map preview promises an intriguing layout. When playing it and realizing the complex interaction of the way gates and the options for attack, I came to believe the first impression from the mini-map was true, as this is a different type of melee map. It goes outside the formula and it could lead to some very interesting matches, more so when both teams attack through the way-gates and meet in the cramped hallway. Pocket gold mine and the defense options are also very appreciated. The way almost a quarter of the map doesn't allow for ground troops can make for some good air fights as well. Slightly sad that the large hydra didn't drop anything, when you can get a skillbook from a murloc right next to it. Perhaps it could have guarded a goblin shop to allow for drop tactics. AI player does not seem to be able to do proper path-finding on the map, which is a minus. Not your usual melee map.

Taiga's Hegemony: Name not using correct format. The map description is missing text. The gold mine in the center is not actually in the center, and overall the map is not fully symmetrical, most notable around the center area. For the gold mine in the center to be the focal point mentioned in the map description I am also missing some motivation for it (3k gold extra isn't enough).

Thawing Snow: Name not using correct format. A good looking mini-map layout, makes this look promising. I am so glad to finally see water utilized correctly, with boats having a meaning and yet at the same time the map also logically allows for ground movement. Very well done and the added touch of the watcher rune to those that brave the creeps in the center is great. Some effort truly went into the terrain and yet manages to keep things simple, easy to understand and practical. Same goes for placement and choice of creeps. Overall this is a beautiful map and a great melee map as well with symmetry done right.

The Etherium: Name not using correct format. The map preview shows a something different and entering the map only confirms this. Its truly a stunning terrain. Trees around spawn isn't overdone and everything just looks amazing. There is some slight asymmetry, but nothing that ruins balance. AI players does struggle slightly with the bridges, but are able to use them. The extra gold mines and differences in protection is a bonus on an already well crafted map that truly stands out. The bridges allows for defensive strategies and overall I can see various tactics being deployed to secure victory. I liked it a lot.

The Forgotten Realm: Name not using correct format. A good solid melee map, with well done terrain matching the same theme of poison and decay. Most creeps fit with this theme. Everything appear symmetrical and is overall a good map. Would have liked a map description though.

Valley of Skulls: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). Plus points for including a quote by my favorite orc of all time. Good looking melee map, in the classic way, although the height difference does make it somewhat of its own, with the defensive ramp and almost pocket expansion. Not bad, though not enough skulls .

Violet Outpost: Name not using correct format. Very fitting terrain matching the expected look from the map description and fits right in with the original wc3 maps. I would have liked to see only wizards/humans inside the fort itself and not trolls, just as rock golems are a bit odd choice as well (going by theme and area), but otherwise a well done symmetrical classic melee map.

Warrior Shrine: Name not using correct format (But does note 1vs1 correctly unlike most others). The map description makes mention of just one shrine, but the map doesn't support it. and from both playing and layout it feels much more as two shrines competing against each other, separated by a small mote (side note: the placement of the same doodad is overdone around the tavern). With that exception it looks good, the height of the player spawn with its several key entry-points make for some engaging tactical maneuvering and the waypoints just add to the options. Quite good.

Waterfalls: Name not using correct format. Its immediately obvious that the map is not symmetrical with the bottom player being noticeably closer to shops. Having the tavern inside the spawn area is a difference with potential (but not typical melee maps). The waterfalls are well done and give a good sense of depth to the map, but the shop area with the doomguards feels weak and I would have preferred to see the theme for the creeps kept and the doomguard avoided. The darn monster doesn't fit well with most terrain.

Forsaken Trinity: Name not using correct format, and unlike all the other maps allow for 3 player instead of 2. The layout looks and feel familiar, but it is symmetrical and have a nice appearance to it. The positioning of the gold mines works great to create conflict and the hard choice between them is appreciated. More so with the island gold mines that require the use of the goblin shop and the defeat of a lvl 10 dragon (that sadly doesn't really drop anything good). I enjoyed the change of pace with 3 players instead of 2, and given that it manages to balance the 3 players and the available resources I am impressed, even if it uses a seen before layout. Still the contest was a 1vs1 map.

(4)Temple Field: Another varied amount of players, this time allowing for 2vs2 or up to 4 players. 1vs1 is also suggested and with the layout its possible as well. The marketplace returns to my joy, however given the location of it, it becomes a comparison with the goblin shop and as such there is a slight symmetry issue. It works well as a 4 player map, and had fun with it (going slightly overboard as it was the last map to test). This skates around the issue with not being 1vs1 map, as it can be done - still not really what the contest asked for.

---------------------- Great work everyone --------------------------

Out of all of them, those that most impressed me was:
Thawing Snow by Knecht
The Etherium by Erkan
Gilneas in Winter by ny RFWH

Its tough to decide between them, so I am glad that we are allowed 5 votes (although I believe 3 would be more balanced). As such I am voting for those I've listed just above + an extra vote on: Living Woods - by Blood Raven for being the most relaxing and in some ways good classic melee maps out of those I played.

With an honorable mention of the "red" Emerald Nightmare by Maxwell (Emeralds tend to be green btw ) - I did miss my vote on this map, but seeing how the results are it likely doesn't matter much.

Wow, you must have spent great time and made great efforts into going through each map! Very enthusiastic of you!

Here are the explanations regarding the issues you've mentioned.

Symmetry: You mentioned the map isn't 100% symmetrical, yet I have no idea which part you are referring to; all neutral buildings and units were placed using copy&paste and thus match perfectly in both sides, let alone main doodads (trees).

Rocks: Without rocks, units tend to enter the red creep zone and they aggro. Rocks were placed to avoid that happening, and therefore their hp were reduced to 10%, which is 25. This way the rocks wouldn't serve any other function other than creep aggro blockage. I am also well aware of the fact that AI doesn't touch rocks but this map is strictly designed for pvp.

Water in front of main: I do not think it's a big deal as many other competitive maps (Turtle Rock, Secret Valley) do have mains surrounded by water. While this map does have water right in front of main, its left(or right) and upper(or lower) sides are ground with buildable area.

 

[deepstrasz]

Name not using correct format.

I don't remember every map on that aspect but the number in brackets before the title should be for the filename only. In the game the player number is shown via a special badge/circle.

goblin shop

Careful with that. There are two neutral buildings with Goblin in their name Anyways, it's clear what you're referring too.

AI player does not seem to be able to do proper path-finding on the map, which is a minus. Not your usual melee map.

That is totally irrelevant in ladder where only humans play.

doomguards feels weak and I would have preferred to see the theme for the creeps kept and the doomguard avoided.

I have to disagree. Doom Guards have more than 1k HP, chaos attack type, heavy armour, Rain of Fire, War Stomp and Cripple.

Still the contest was a 1vs1 map.

I'm not sure what exactly you're implying. Just to be clear, this map can be played 1v1 and the interesting thing about it is, that you have to scout to know where your enemy is due to two possible starting points. As you've written, it's symmetrical, so the addition of a Start Location is only a bonus. Also, the contest jury judges the map from the 1v1 perspective which I'm pretty sure that 3 starting points won't be a problem at all considering all facts. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Thanks for your time @RED BARON!

 

[Maxwell]

With an honorable mention of the "red" Emerald Nightmare by Maxwell (Emeralds tend to be green btw ) - I did miss my vote on this map, but seeing how the results are it likely doesn't matter much.

Emerald Nightmare is a location from World of Warcraft Lore.

Spoiler

 

[mafe]

It is great to see the discussion about the issues with reviewing and testing. I intended to mostly stay away from discussing maps publicly during the voting phase, since as a competitor, I am somewhat biased. Still, now there are some points which I simply cannot resist to comment on:

First of all, it is true that there is lack of communication between mappers and players. That being said, I had hoped that anyone who participates here is a regular wc3 player himself, but I consider that highly unlikely. I simply cannot imagine how one can expect to make competitive map without being at somewhat experienced melee player yourself. It might be somewhat controversial, but maybe for the next context, to enter one should link a bnet account with a sufficient number of 1v1s played so that it is clear players also have playing experience. I think a good player is way more likely to make a good melee map thatn someone who only maps and rarely ever plays or at least watches wc3.

While it is a good idea, getting (pro) player input for the contest also means that there would be more recently-created accounts voted. Just so anyone knows, I've been linking this contest in the wc3 gym discord channel, which is a quite active channel where people care about 1v1 wc3 mostly. Some people from over there were in the contest anyway, and until now, I think there might 2-3 other who have voted here. I'm a little disappointed it didnt have a greater effect. Also they have a ~monthly-ish cup where they might play some maps from the contest in the next edition.

More on the lack of interaction between communities: In the months before the contest, I've been playing wc3 in bnet mostly for myself. For map testing, I joined the community above, and very soon it was unavoidable to learn who @HighTac is: He runs the FFAMastersLeague which I would imagine is the highest lvl of FFA in the western scene at least. They recently got some pros to play in a showmatch. Hope that is ok to spread this information about the judge, but it is nothing that could not be found with a simple google search.
Also who is this video guy? I didnt realize it at first, but this is the guy b2w brought in to cast the americas wca qualifiers one year ago (for example,

). So yes, he definitely isnt a nobody.
Also, @RehcraM (one of the pariticpants) is a co-editor for warcraft3.info.

Now about the video and the reviews by @RED BARON : I'm afraid spending 3-5 hours for reviewing is almost nothing. I really appreciate the work you have been doing, but still, it is only a very short amount of time and will miss some key parts. I will take your ciriticism of my map as an example:

Fields of Ruin: Name not using correct format. There is a good in here with the island goldmine, and potentially more easily defendable bottom mines. However the map does suffer from not being equal in its parts. More terrain for one side, more trees for one side and things a slightly skewered towards the top player. I enjoyed the tactical goldmine placements. There is an odd thing going on with item drops - I almost only got circlet of nobility from drops, which makes me wonder if there is a problem with the item table.

-Name: See the comment by @deepstrasz
-Island/easily defendable bottom gold mines: I dont understand, is this a statement of facts, or do you mean to say it is good or bad? In any case, you can see that SV and LR have easily defendable third gold mines to, which is the role I also wanted for these gold mines. The game should not be on a "timer" that gold runs out at some point, so I wanted some safe mining positions for the time AFTER the main gold mines run out.
-"However the map does suffer from not being equal in its parts. More terrain for one side, .. things a slightly skewered towards the top player." No. If you look at it in the editor, you will see that all neutral building are placed in next-to perfect symmetry. "More terrain for one side"? Again, I dont understand. Do you mean that there is more buildable parts for one base? Or that I did more terraining for one side, i.e. one side of the map looks better than the other?
-"more trees for one side." Yes one side has some more trees, but I think the trees that will actually be harvested are about equal. I guess it is a matter of opinion.
-"I enjoyed the tactical goldmine placements." Thank you!
-"There is an odd thing going on with item drops - I almost only got circlet of nobility from drops, which makes me wonder if there is a problem with the item table." No. You can check this in the editor, but obviously, if you do this for every map, then there goes another 1-2 hours.
-But the main problem with your comment is this: You completely missed the main point of my map, the random building, as you only played the map once and didnt look at it in the editor.

Again, thank you a lot for all of your work, but I see things differently in a lot of aspects. Yet this is not because I think you are a bad player/mapper, but because it is inevitable that you cannot evaluate everything in this amount of time to the same extend as I (hopefully) did.

Same goes for the video:
-Orange (the video guy) criticised my random building as a potential balance problem (even thought he said he liked the idea), because it gives different options in each matchup. But with the same argument, you can completely dismiss random items as unbalanced. So I'm not buying that yet.
-On the other hand, he didnt care about items at all, which means he misses one key aspects of balance completely, where I have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about
-He also thought I had too many maigc immune creeps, when the spot had one lvl9 granite golem and all other creeps there were not magic immunes. On AZ, for example, there is a 9-6-6 golem spot which is completely magic immune.


So unless you invest days of work, any feedback can only be about a very small and somewhat random aspects of the map. We just have to have accept that, and at the same point do not take things too personal. Even with the judges, this probably cannot be avoided, and it is not their fault.

For example, let me do some "feedback" which clearly proves that TM is a shitmap, if it would be introduced today:
-Much too large. It is even larger than TR, which is the largest map "so far".
-Islands expansions, wtf? We dont have those. LT had islands, and noone ever used those.
-Blatant asymmetries: One half of the starting positions has shops nearby, the other has merc camps. How can it be balanced if one player can have mercs early on and the other has not? Also, you cant even militi-creep the shop, as the creeps there are stronger than at the merc camp,
-Spawning imbalances: If, for example in hu vs ud, I spawn as hu in the southeast and the ud in the southwest, creeping the laboratory is much more dangerous than if the ud would spawn at the other two positions.
-Items, wtf? So many possibilities for orcs to pimp up their blademaster with claws, and then there 6 spots where they might get a vamp aura.
-As ne, if I want to AoW-creep, I have build it so far away from base I cant defend a towerrush.
...... and so on.

So any criticism needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

One last thing: I am very disappointed that L8man has apparently cheated. His map was probably the best overall for me.

 

[deepstrasz]

maybe for the next context, to enter one should link a bnet account with a sufficient number of 1v1s played so that it is clear players also have playing experience.

We're mostly artists here from what I gather. Playing is on step two. Your suggestion, although pertinently technical, would kill the number of entries and interest.

random building as a potential balance problem (even thought he said he liked the idea), because it gives different options in each matchup. But with the same argument, you can completely dismiss random items as unbalanced. So I'm not buying that yet.

Good point.

 

[MysteryMaze]

BTW, I would like to update my map. It is okay to post the updated map as a new thread? Or do I have to wait until the result comes out.

 

[deepstrasz]

BTW, I would like to update my map. It is okay to post the updated map as a new thread? Or do I have to wait until the result comes out.

Wait for the contest to end. Then update the map's thread. Don't spam another one... Have patience.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Wait for the contest to end. Then update the map's thread. Don't spam another one... Have patience.

Ok I will

 

[Naze]

@Naze Has already cleaned the thread please talk about something else instead of the voting issue, please.

Don't worry, I only had to clean the thread because people were getting too aggressive towards users.

by the way somebody explain me, it is bad the tavern in the center?, because the guy who made the review in youtube didn´t llike the tavern in the center.

Yes now I'm curious. Why exactly is this? I guess people with blademasters may try to dominate the area/attack recently respawned heroes (which are weaker), or a player may try to fortify the area around the tavern to deny access to neutral heroes. But idk, these are just normal game possibilities for me.

 

[deepstrasz]

or a player may try to fortify the area around the tavern to deny access to neutral heroes. But idk, these are just normal game possibilities for me.

I doubt that. Since usually Taverns in the middle are basically not surrounded by doodads or cliffs but may have unbuildable tiles around whilst on the maps where there are more Taverns, they are usually placed near doodads or cliffs, however the distance being longer for a player to reach the one near the enemy.
I wouldn't worry about Blademasters. A level 1 hero has at least 500 HP.
I think he might have been referring to it from an aesthetic point of view as in many or most maps have this stereotype of the Tavern being in the middle.

 

[Anomines]

Yes now I'm curious. Why exactly is this? I guess people with blademasters may try to dominate the area/attack recently respawned heroes (which are weaker), or a player may try to fortify the area around the tavern to deny access to neutral heroes. But idk, these are just normal game possibilities for me.

Where does he say that with the Tavern?

I seriously doubt that he meant it that way but could you show me the part where he says it?
The only thing i could think of is that when two players get a naga second at the same time that often one of them is doomed to die instantly. That would be the difference to 2 Taverns, but personally i think it is this kind of skirmishes that make the game good. Also some cheesy hidden unit Tavernherospawn surround and stuff like that happens mostly on maps with a single tavern. But again, I think thats more of a pro than a con

 

[Keito]

Taverns are usally placed in the middle of maps because there are only 1 of them, and both players would require equal access. The center of maps provide this, as well as being close to everything, yet far away from anything important. Additionally it forces the player to have map control in order to revive the hero from the tavern. Where the tavern in the base, the player could freely defend with ressurected tavern heroes until they run out of gold. Having the tavern as far away as possible for each player, while still having it accessiable, forces the player to have units on the map to revive their hero. This grants counter-play to the opponent, by having them deny scouts send to revive, or kill the ressurected hero before they can rejoin with their army.

 

[WolfFarkas]

Where does he say that with the Tavern?

I seriously doubt that he meant it that way but could you show me the part where he says it?
The only thing i could think of is that when two players get a naga second at the same time that often one of them is doomed to die instantly. That would be the difference to 2 Taverns, but personally i think it is this kind of skirmishes that make the game good. Also some cheesy hidden unit Tavernherospawn surround and stuff like that happens mostly on maps with a single tavern. But again, I think thats more of a pro than a con

I could´nt find the part where he says don´t put the tavern in the middle and laugh,
with the second map in the first video, 5:28, he says tavern in the middle, and then every time the youtube guy see a tavern in the middle he limits to say tavern in the middle, in the second video min 12:40

Taverns are usally placed in the middle of maps because there are only 1 of them, and both players would require equal access. The center of maps provide this, as well as being close to everything, yet far away from anything important. Additionally it forces the player to have map control in order to revive the hero from the tavern. Where the tavern in the base, the player could freely defend with ressurected tavern heroes until they run out of gold. Having the tavern as far away as possible for each player, while still having it accessiable, forces the player to have units on the map to revive their hero. This grants counter-play to the opponent, by having them deny scouts send to revive, or kill the ressurected hero before they can rejoin with their army.

wow, thanks a lot, now this what I call read the newspaper of today


this is the kind of information, that mappers or some mappers who don´t play pro (me) are missing.

I would like to make you like 100 questions about game play, but shure you are busy, maybe after the contest I can make you one or two

see ya

 

[Anomines]

I could´nt find the part where he says don´t put the tavern in the middle and laugh,
with the second map in the first video, 5:28, he says tavern in the middle, and then every time the youtube guy see a tavern in the middle he limits to say tavern in the middle, in the second video min 12:40

Hes not talking about the Tavern in the middle as something related to gameplay, its just about "Casters Curse"

Casters curse is when a caster is commenting the game, saying one thing but the exact opposite happens the next seconds/minutes
Like for instance. "The Blademaster is not going to die" - 2 seconds later - Blademaster dies.

In this case the first 10 maps he opened had the Tavern in the middle, then he mentioned that all of them have the Tavern in the middle. Once he opened the next 4 maps all of them didint have them centered.
When he opened the second map in vid 2 (my map) and said "minus 10 points", it was obviously a joke referring to the casters curse

 

[WolfFarkas]

Hes not talking about the Tavern in the middle as something related to gameplay, its just about "Casters Curse"

Casters curse is when a caster is commenting the game, saying one thing but the exact opposite happens the next seconds/minutes
Like for instance. "The Blademaster is not going to die" - 2 seconds later - Blademaster dies.

In this case the first 10 maps he opened had the Tavern in the middle, then he mentioned that all of them have the Tavern in the middle. Once he opened the next 4 maps all of them didint have them centered.
When he opened the second map in vid 2 (my map) and said "minus 10 points", it was obviously a joke referring to the casters curse

you say he was joking?

there was a map, where an user put 2 tanverns, not in the middle and he liked that,

and @Sister She gave some interesting reasons why not put only one tavern in the middle.

 

[mafe]

you say he was joking?

there was a map, where an user put 2 tanverns, not in the middle and he liked that,

and @Sister She gave some interesting reasons why not put the tavern in the middle.

Imho @SisterShe only provides reasons why the tavern should be in the middle, as this leads to gameplay aspects which are generally considered to be interesting. Gaining mapcontrol and scouting/denying scouting are things that reward skill. Having a safe and guaranteed instant revive doesnt.

 

[WolfFarkas]

Imho @SisterShe only provides reasons why the tavern should be in the middle, as this leads to gameplay aspects which are generally considered to be interesting. Gaining mapcontrol and scouting/denying scouting are things that reward skill. Having a safe and guaranteed instant revive doesnt.

oh my, I thought that have your hero killed while is far a way from your army was not cool because of enemy camping,

well but still, the video guy seems to don´t like that much the tavern in the middle, probably because is a cliche

 

[Anomines]

you say he was joking?

there was a map, where an user put 2 tanverns, not in the middle and he liked that,

and @Sister She gave some interesting reasons why not put only one tavern in the middle.

Show me that part in the vid and we can talk

Also I think Sister She actually meant the opposite, but i could be wrong

 

[WolfFarkas]

Show me that part in the vid and we can talk

Also I think Sister She actually meant the opposite, but i could be wrong

I am going to donwload those videos and come back with the info

 

[HighTac]

I'd say at least two-thirds of competitively played melee maps have the tavern in the middle (TM, TR, NI, AZ, AI, SV, EI, TS). I agree with Sister She on why taverns are not supposed to be close to main bases. With just one tavern in the middle, you have nice dynamics of people "guarding" the tavern later in the game and denying hero revival. Also, you avoid ower-powered tower rushes where people can pick up (second or even first) heroes basically in front of the enemy base. However, two non-centrally but not close to main base located taverns can be balanced either, but it'll make matches a bit different of course. Also, while two shops or merc camps make sense, because items and mercenaries have cooldown, some people might argue that a redundant tavern is a waste of space since heroes obviously have no cooldown.

@Sister She and I will provide comprehensive feedback for every map in the contest next week, after the poll is closed. Looking forward to that and your feedback.

 

[pick-a-chew]

Yeah, I'm triggered because of him laughing of my red map

I really appreciated the thought you put behind by using a tileset that's based on Warcraft Lore but not in (default) Warcraft 3 . I think the people who complain about the redness/compare it to Outland (lol) probably don't know what the Emerald Nightmare is!

 

[RED BARON]

Clearly too tired when I posted my remarks (and forgot to edit it to be more than just my notes):

Wow, you must have spent great time and made great efforts into going through each map! Very enthusiastic of you!

Nah, I should as mentioned have been doing something else. Its the good old procrastination. + When people put effort into creating content for a contest, I believe I should do the same for when I vote. Giving all an equal chance until I've tried it myself.

Spoiler: Show post

Symmetry: You mentioned the map isn't 100% symmetrical, yet I have no idea which part you are referring to; all neutral buildings and units were placed using copy&paste and thus match perfectly in both sides, let alone main doodads (trees).

Rocks: Without rocks, units tend to enter the red creep zone and they aggro. Rocks were placed to avoid that happening, and therefore their hp were reduced to 10%, which is 25. This way the rocks wouldn't serve any other function other than creep aggro blockage. I am also well aware of the fact that AI doesn't touch rocks but this map is strictly designed for pvp.

Water in front of main: I do not think it's a big deal as many other competitive maps (Turtle Rock, Secret Valley) do have mains surrounded by water. While this map does have water right in front of main, its left(or right) and upper(or lower) sides are ground with buildable area.

Yea, thats why I need to edit it through for readability, instead of notes. The symmatry: Its almost there to a point that its irrelevant, we are talking minute differences, and just noted down as I saw it during play. Rocks: I would still work out a different solution for it, as the rocks feel out of place and is as mentioned annoying. Water in front of main, is mostly that I felt it left me very open from the most direct path to the opponent, and thus limited my options for defense.

Spoiler: Show post

I don't remember every map on that aspect but the number in brackets before the title should be for the filename only. In the game the player number is shown via a special badge/circle.

Careful with that. There are two neutral buildings with Goblin in their name Anyways, it's clear what you're referring too.

That is totally irrelevant in ladder where only humans play.

I have to disagree. Doom Guards have more than 1k HP, chaos attack type, heavy armour, Rain of Fire, War Stomp and Cripple.

I'm not sure what exactly you're implying. Just to be clear, this map can be played 1v1 and the interesting thing about it is, that you have to scout to know where your enemy is due to two possible starting points. As you've written, it's symmetrical, so the addition of a Start Location is only a bonus. Also, the contest jury judges the map from the 1v1 perspective which I'm pretty sure that 3 starting points won't be a problem at all considering all facts. Sorry if I misunderstood.

The note situation again. Name convention = notes to myself about the correct icon being shown for the map - CnP throughout and noted for those that had the correct one for melee maps - Didn't even consider or check file names. Goblin Laboratory would be the name for when I edit it AI problems: Not really irrelevant. It indicates a pathing problem, and more importantly it is in my eyes a good thing for a player to be able to play a melee map against an AI, rather than a map where they can't (practice purpose, testing so forth). Its the basic of have or have not, and as such when all other maps have it, its a minus.
Doomguard: Again notes.. I meant that they felt out of place and that the doomguard to me is a weak choice for a strong unit (for the theme). I do agree its a strong fighting unit
Amount of players: I am noting it because it says 1vs1 on the contest page, not because I believe it to be a bad thing (Need to check if it comes across as such). Rather it is an added bonus and was a refreshing change.

Now about the video and the reviews by @RED BARON : I'm afraid spending 3-5 hours for reviewing is almost nothing. I really appreciate the work you have been doing, but still, it is only a very short amount of time and will miss some key parts. I will take your ciriticism of my map as an example:

Spoiler: Show rest of the post

-Name: See the comment by deepstrasz
-Island/easily defendable bottom gold mines: I dont understand, is this a statement of facts, or do you mean to say it is good or bad? In any case, you can see that SV and LR have easily defendable third gold mines to, which is the role I also wanted for these gold mines. The game should not be on a "timer" that gold runs out at some point, so I wanted some safe mining positions for the time AFTER the main gold mines run out.
-"However the map does suffer from not being equal in its parts. More terrain for one side, .. things a slightly skewered towards the top player." No. If you look at it in the editor, you will see that all neutral building are placed in next-to perfect symmetry. "More terrain for one side"? Again, I dont understand. Do you mean that there is more buildable parts for one base? Or that I did more terraining for one side, i.e. one side of the map looks better than the other?
-"more trees for one side." Yes one side has some more trees, but I think the trees that will actually be harvested are about equal. I guess it is a matter of opinion.
-"I enjoyed the tactical goldmine placements." Thank you!
-"There is an odd thing going on with item drops - I almost only got circlet of nobility from drops, which makes me wonder if there is a problem with the item table." No. You can check this in the editor, but obviously, if you do this for every map, then there goes another 1-2 hours.
-But the main problem with your comment is this: You completely missed the main point of my map, the random building, as you only played the map once and didnt look at it in the editor.

Again, thank you a lot for all of your work, but I see things differently in a lot of aspects. Yet this is not because I think you are a bad player/mapper, but because it is inevitable that you cannot evaluate everything in this amount of time to the same extend as I (hopefully) did.

Same goes for the video:
-Orange (the video guy) criticised my random building as a potential balance problem (even thought he said he liked the idea), because it gives different options in each matchup. But with the same argument, you can completely dismiss random items as unbalanced. So I'm not buying that yet.
-On the other hand, he didnt care about items at all, which means he misses one key aspects of balance completely, where I have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about
-He also thought I had too many maigc immune creeps, when the spot had one lvl9 granite golem and all other creeps there were not magic immunes. On AZ, for example, there is a 9-6-6 golem spot which is completely magic immune.


So unless you invest days of work, any feedback can only be about a very small and somewhat random aspects of the map. We just have to have accept that, and at the same point do not take things too personal. Even with the judges, this probably cannot be avoided, and it is not their fault.

For example, let me do some "feedback" which clearly proves that TM is a shitmap, if it would be introduced today:
-Much too large. It is even larger than TR, which is the largest map "so far".
-Islands expansions, wtf? We dont have those. LT had islands, and noone ever used those.
-Blatant asymmetries: One half of the starting positions has shops nearby, the other has merc camps. How can it be balanced if one player can have mercs early on and the other has not? Also, you cant even militi-creep the shop, as the creeps there are stronger than at the merc camp,
-Spawning imbalances: If, for example in hu vs ud, I spawn as hu in the southeast and the ud in the southwest, creeping the laboratory is much more dangerous than if the ud would spawn at the other two positions.
-Items, wtf? So many possibilities for orcs to pimp up their blademaster with claws, and then there 6 spots where they might get a vamp aura.
-As ne, if I want to AoW-creep, I have build it so far away from base I cant defend a towerrush.
...... and so on.

So any criticism needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

I'll keep it brief: Clearly you didn't see top part of the post, so I'll elaborate my statement a little more here: those are not in-depth reviews, this is me spending hours play-testing because I want my vote on this contest to have some argument behind it, rather than a random preference like color/name/user whatever. I am not a judge, if I was things would be rather different. No matter the user or the background of who comments on your map you need to consider critic and comments differently from how I get the impression you currently do (even if that is not the intention). It becomes dismissive of any who might look at it, because they will never get the full depth of it. A user who plays a map for a short duration still has a first experience and the potential to stumble upon key-problems from that short duration. Already claiming that judges, reviews and remarks should mostly be ignored as they are just random and small issues is not a good idea for improvement. Furthermore your word choice you come across as fairly patronizing.

An example for why your statement about time and judgment is faulty: You put hours into your map, considered every detail and know all about it, but I am the player. I do not test things in the editor - I do not play the map multiple times. I play it and I get my first experience of it. It does not satisfy me, so I go to a different map. Would it have impressed me if I kept playing and noticed potential nuances? Maybe. But you already lost the player on the most important aspect: First impression and that was what I did. A judge will need to consider more if those aspects are part of the judgment, so he/she would need to go more in-depth, but the player you are hopefully making your map for, he does not need to do that.

I really could go out on a tangent here, as it admittedly annoys me a great deal how you dismiss other people's effort while saying "its not their fault" like they were some poor people who didn't know or didn't have a choice. Besides that I do concur that one should always consider the context in which the critique was given, but mostly in regards to how it should be addressed.

About goldmines: Yes, what you wrote as to the intention of the goldmines was exactly what my note was meant to praise as a good point.

All in all I made those remarks from my personal perspective and my votes are as mentioned based not only on gameplay/balance/shops e.g. but also on how I see the map working for spectators, first impression and so forth.

----------------

As it should be clear from the above reply to other users I posted my notes and not what I actually intended to post (hence the odd sentences as well & stray comments). For instance the item drop was not meant to be part of any note, just the curious fact that I got only circle from all creep drops except one. An edit will come when I get the time to clear things up from being somewhat incoherent notes.

Emerald Nightmare is a location from World of Warcraft Lore.

Ah Blizzard and their fascination with using the wrong names for specific colored regions. Should have thought of it, but my WoW lore is lacking. At least they nailed it with the Emerald dream.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Clearly too tired when I posted my remarks (and forgot to edit it to be more than just my notes):



Nah, I should as mentioned have been doing something else. Its the good old procrastination. + When people put effort into creating content for a contest, I believe I should do the same for when I vote. Giving all an equal chance until I've tried it myself.



Yea, thats why I need to edit it through for readability, instead of notes. The symmatry: Its almost there to a point that its irrelevant, we are talking minute differences, and just noted down as I saw it during play. Rocks: I would still work out a different solution for it, as the rocks feel out of place and is as mentioned annoying. Water in front of main, is mostly that I felt it left me very open from the most direct path to the opponent, and thus limited my options for defense.

I think the defenseless state you've mentioned has more to do with psychological effect.

The upper map is Amazonia and is also very open in front of base. Since players wouldn't construct buildings far away from the yellow line, I don't think it's gonna really matter. I think water can make you feel more exposed as unbuildable areas ( The psychological difference of not doing something and not being able to do something is huge, I think. )

Again, for the symmetry, I do not know which minute difference you are referring to. All neutral buildings and tree walls surrounding them were placed by copy&paste. Well, there could be some doodads variations for visual aspects, like one side tree and the other side column, but that's not gonna make any difference in terms of gameplay.

 

[mafe]

@RED BARON You are right, I was somewhat disrespectful of your effort. I apologize.

 

[RED BARON]

@RED BARON You are right, I was somewhat disrespectful of your effort. I apologize.

No worries - my own rather incoherent rambling notes without edits created throughout the night made for some odd impressions as well (And even missed vote I wanted to cast - but heck life goes on). (Honestly though I got like 16 circles on the map haha the luck)

 

[WolfFarkas]

Show me that part in the vid and we can talk

Also I think Sister She actually meant the opposite, but i could be wrong

yes second video of the youtube guy, min 6:25, a map with two taverns, he says: is kind a cool place to put a tavern, I like that, the only issue is, is a bit near base, .... two separate bases tend to get closer, is a nitt picky thing (hard to understand it)

note:gonna read the rest and edit my post so I follow the others conversations

edit: I read almost all, I think one message, go away, but I read Red Baron wall of text

about the tavern, yes it goes in the center, but probably this guy from youtube (when I say this guy is with all the respect, Is just I don´t how to call him, Orange was?, well youtube guy them,) got bored from all tavern in the center, I would do the same, he got interest in a map with taverns not in the center but that could be tricky if they are near base (as @Sister She spoted)



@RED BARON review: look inside the editor is mandatory for review, since most of the bugs are spoted there, like banshee looting, the trees have to be counted with the doodad couter of the editor, and even distances have to be checked with numbers, never with the eyes. Wood can be trick it can be less compacted in some areas and more dense with the shift botton.
"More terrain for one side"
carefull with that, eyes trick the mind, sometimes when I am mapping I have to count the cluster one by one, because the eyes can trick you, for example ramp A, 1..2..3..4... 13 clusters, the other side the same 1... 2... 3... 13 clusters. Never trust your eyes, they are lying you, cluster count, and position numbers. There can be optical ilusion related to the placement of big objects or cool effects.

@mafe: I think the contest should be free to participate, is more like for the guy who has the willing than the guy who has the experience (experienced guys can have mistakes too)
What I sugest, is, to reduce the number of maps, and so people don´t get out of the contest:

team work 2: and here the work can be shared, one does the terraining and eviroment and the other the item balance and beta test (beta test requires a lot of time), or the work can be shared, half I did this you continue ping pong thing, you do beta tes with humans and Night elves, I do with orcs and undead. And here an experienced player can mate with an experienced terrainer and have a very interesting combination,is good way to both learn something, also if the work is not all in the arms of one person, the numbers of bugs can be reduced, sometimes many bugs comes from being tired.

 

[deepstrasz]

team work 2: and here the work can be shared, one does the terraining and eviroment and the other the item balance and beta test (beta test requires a lot of time), or the work can be shared, half I did this you continue ping pong thing, you do beta tes with humans and Night elves, I do with orcs and undead. And here an experienced player can mate with an experienced terrainer and have a very interesting combination,is good way to both learn something, also if the work is not all in the arms of one person, the numbers of bugs can be reduced, sometimes many bugs comes from being tired.

Good luck with finding people and time for that...

 

[RED BARON]

@RED BARON review: look inside the editor is mandatory for review, since most of the bugs are spoted there, like banshee looting, the trees have to be counted with the doodad couter of the editor, and even distances have to be checked with numbers, never with the eyes. Wood can be trick it can be more compacted in some areas and more dense with the shift botton.
"More terrain for one side"
carefull with that, eyes trick the mind, sometimes when I am mapping I have to count the cluster one by one, because the eyes can trick you, for example ramp A, 1..2..3..4... 13 clusters, the other side the same 1... 2... 3... 13 clusters. Never trust your eyes, they are lying you, cluster count, and position numbers. There can be optical ilusion related to the placement of big objects or cool effects.

Again, not a review. Its comments and reasoning for vote. Not a review, and not a judgement. Hence player experience, not editor testing. If my eyes get tricked in the map, well thats what the player playing will see. If the actual number is the same, still - the one playing was tricked. Yep, bugs, hidden features and all are of course easier to see and better to spot with the editor, but this is a player experience for voting arguments, not a in-depth review. Consider my post (more so when I get it edited) remarks about my first impression of the maps. (EDIT: And then I realized that I wrote review in my initial post.. well done tired me... changed)

 

[WolfFarkas]

Again, not a review. Its comments and reasoning for vote. Not a review, and not a judgement. Hence player experience, not editor testing. If my eyes get tricked in the map, well thats what the player playing will see. If the actual number is the same, still - the one playing was tricked. Yep, bugs, hidden features and all are of course easier to see and better to spot with the editor, but this is a player experience for voting arguments, not a in-depth review. Consider my post (more so when I get it edited) remarks about my first impression of the maps. (EDIT: And then I realized that I wrote review in my initial post.. well done tired me... changed)

what you did is invaluable, many bugs are detected by testing, like get 3 times the same item, also the better way to see if the creeps are ok, is by beta test, in the editor is hard to figure if your gonna have a hard time cammping it or not, when you do in game you can see that. But many others things have to be evaluated inside the editor, such tree counts and numbers counts. I have some problems by seeing if an horizonal and a vertical ramp are equal by eye, I have to count clusters, and rocks near the ramps can trick you.

edit1

Good luck with finding people and time for that...

in this contest like 50 people suscribed, 30 maps where done and 4 finished but couldnt join the contest, because the limit, a 96x96 map can be done in a month, and many maps have been done by teamwork such as the TD or AOS. This could mean the reduction of 30 maps to maybe 15 or even 10 maps.

actually I got the idea with the hero contest. there is a team work of 3 persons is reasonable proposal.

 

[RED BARON]

what you did is invaluable, many bugs are detected by testing, like get 3 times the same item, also the better way to see if the creeps are ok, is by beta test, in the editor is hard to figure if your gonna have a hard time cammping it or not, when you do in game you can see that. But many others things have to be evaluated inside the editor, such tree counts and numbers counts. I have some problems by seeing if an horizonal and a vertical ramp are equal by eye, I have to count clusters, and rocks near the ramps can trick you.

edit1

in this contest like 50 people suscribed, 30 maps where done and 4 finished but couldnt join the contest, because the limit, a 96x96 map can be done in a month, and many maps have been done by teamwork such as the TD or AOS. This could mean the reduction of 30 maps to maybe 15 or even 10 maps.

actually I got the idea with the hero contest. there is a team work of 3 persons.

Why the double reply?

 

[WolfFarkas]

Why the double reply?

Was not my intention, If you see I edited my post, I wanted to reply other thing from a previus page and I forgot I was the last who wrote, so I merged the posts. I will never have the intention of double post.

 

[L8man]

Hey, did I get disqualified for some reason? ((

 

[RED BARON]

Hey, did I get disqualified for some reason? ((

Yes:

L8man is now officially removed from the contest: he is no longer in the poll and in the entries list.

He has been disqualified from the contest due to vote abuse. He (or his friends) registered new accounts to vote strictly for him in the poll, and who were also multiaccounting. This is unfair with other participants who also dedicated time to their work and are participating honestly.

 

[Kyrbi0]

actually I got the idea with the hero contest. there is a team work of 3 persons is reasonable proposal.

I don't know that I'd call it "reasonable"...

 

[WolfFarkas]

I don't know that I'd call it "reasonable"...

okey, forget the idea.

 

[Ether]

I voted honestly here and all I got was chewed up and never to be crapped out again.

 

[RED BARON]

I voted honestly here and all I got was chewed up and never to be crapped out again.

Huh? What are you talking about?

 

[Ether]

Huh? What are you talking about?

Something bad happening even I did not do something bad. You know how crap that is.

 

[Michael the Boombringer]

@Svetli Is it just me not paying attention or your map is not there?

 

[Anomines]

Poll is closed, so i guess thats the final result for the public vote:

1. Emerald Nightmare (30,5%)
2/3. The Etherium & Fields of Ruin (22%)
4 - 6. Coral Reef & Living Woods & Thawing Snow (18,6%)
7/8. Violet Outpost & Swamped Temple (15,3%)
9 - 11. Irresistible Mind & Gilneas in Winter & Pillars of Honor (13,6%)
12. Fractured Monarch (10,2%)
13 - 16. Outskirt Stroll & River Valley &Endgame in the Netherworld & Valley of Skulls (8,5%)

Did not list the maps below 5 votes

@Svetli Is it just me not paying attention or your map is not there?

He got disqualified

 

[Naze]

The poll is closed.

The judges, HighTac and SisterShe, are also done with their judging too. Due to the size of this contest it'll take some time to calculate the final score, adjust the last details and double-check everything. So the results will be out in a day or two. Keep tuned!

 

[Kyrbi0]

That was fast. Noice.

 

[The Panda]

I guess I'm looking forward to the results but well see.

 

[Anomines]

1. Emerald Nightmare
2/3. The Etherium & Fields of Ruin
4 - 6. Coral Reef & Living Woods & Thawing Snow
7. Swamped Temple
8 - 10. Violet Outpost & Irresistible Mind & Pillars of Honor
11. Gilneas in Winter
12. Fractured Monarch
13 - 15. Outskirt Stroll & Endgame in the Netherworld & Valley of Skulls


Did not list the maps below 5 votes

I forgot that some people voted for themselves, so I guess the ranking is a bit different. Changed that. Anyways, doesn't matter since the official results should be out soon

 

[RED BARON]

I'll be looking forward to the final results. Going to be interesting how things fair with the judges.

 

[HighTac]

EXCITING!!!!!!!!

 

[Maxwell]

Yeah, something like that. It's kinda weird that my map got first position in the poll, But I'm sure that judges will put the thing on their places.

 

[HighTac]

Just out of curiosity, @Maxwell can you estimate how many hours of work you put into Emerald?