Melee Mapping Contest #4 - Poll

[deepstrasz]

Don't worry, it's a popularity contest.
Nobody really cares.

Did I hear Eurovision?

 

[Nudl9]

Why the hate for the poll? I mean, sure, it has its flaws, but instead of just critising it, you should give us a better example of how to do it in the future.

Because the people who vote don't play or test the map. How do i know?

1# Too many entries, nobody is going to waste their time playing every map for 15+ minutes (4 hours of playtime at least). If there are any melee players they will only pick and play the map that looks the best. If a mapmaker cast the vote i think they're most likely to judge the map based on overview and general looks, maybe they'll open it in the editor. But the matter of the fact is, few of the mapmakers here also play melee actively, which you can tell by the liberal use of boats, waygates, etc - cancerous features that don't belong in melee.

2# The voters, if you click on the poll there are voters with 1-5 posts. If you aren't getting your friends to vote for you, you're just shooting yourself in the foot. It's the optimal way to win. Entries have been disqualified before because of friendly voting, but how are the moderators supposed to tell which ones are "good voters" and "bad voters", it's highly subjective and so the system is inaccurate because theres no way to determine "proper votes".

3# Theres not enough voters to create accurate average results. It looks a lot now, but thats because every voter has the option of voting for 5 maps.

4# When mapmakers vote, they vote on the maps with the most gimmicks, which don't necessarily create good melee maps at all. I've written critical posts before about why red tilesets are inherently flawed, why boats are cancer. Waygates should be self explanatory. It would have been better if the poll was hosted in a place where actual melee players reside, because the maps were made for them. Hosting the poll in an active melee forum like WC3 Gym Discord would have been a good start.

Like i don't want to be that guy that call people idiots here, but you have mapmakers here that disregard certain maps because "oh look its just another green map" or it "has lordearon summer merc camp", how unoriginal. Which really speaks volumes, because it means they didn't read Mafe's competetive melee guide - who is one of the judges. You would be an idiot not to read it, yet clearly many people didn't do it. These same people are the ones to cast votes, so yeah.. my faith in this poll is pretty abysmal.

I think it's better to leave the maps to the judges. With Mafe and Lawliet as judges i expect accurate results. I'm not gonna rethread on Chaco drama as i've filed a pretty lengthy formal complaint.

 

[deepstrasz]

cancerous features that don't belong in melee.

until they are properly integrated.

as i've written a pretty lengthy formal complaint.

more like informal.

You are free to open up a thread in Site Discussion pertaining the contest score system.
The problem with only judges is that many contests have few to one judge.

 

[Nudl9]

Boats can't be properly integrated because the feature is cancer. It's inherently flawed.
Theres a reason nagas, boats got discarded as a multiplayer element with the release of TFT.
It's clunky and creates lots of new imbalance issues.

Transport ships have 1500 hp which is just broken.
If your transport ship gets ensnared and surrounded, everything inside dies - largely Orc favoured.
The turn rate creates a lot of problems with ships in combat.
The load range is too low.
Collision size too big makes pathing clunky.
Naval pathfiding in general is just clunky.
To make a "boat" map the maps also need water which means less buildable terrain.
Frigates are basicly paper and not worth the price, because it has light armor which sucks.
The siege boat is OP as fuck if the map has any bases exposed water.


I don't particular mind the poll voting system because it favours me lol. But it's not exactly a fair or even good system. So embrace it for what it is, a popularity contest. The most household name wins.

 

[deepstrasz]

Boats can't be properly integrated because the feature is cancer. It's inherently flawed.

Thanks for the technical details.
Way I see it, Zeppelins are worse in that they fly and can be abused better. Transport ships are at more risk of your army actually getting killed opposed to just be stunned when the zeppelin is destroyed. As far as the attack ships go, there's nothing some stats tweaking and gameplay thinking can't do to make them viable.

As written above, some stats tweaking makes wonders.
It's a risk you'll have to take then. Frankly it's stupid that doesn't happen when the zeppelin crashes. Anyway, I guess that's why they've put the high HP. This can be fixed in a way that units would be thrown to the nearest walkable land patch and stunned.
Turn rates are supposed to be weird since, well, ships plus ships are usually strong to compensate.
The load range can also be easily changed.
Pathing can also be modified. However, this is quite subjective. Big units, generally have pathing issues. Besides, in Warcraft III ships aren't supposed to be mass produced but used as mercenaries.
Less buildable terrain? I don't recall ladder being a kingdom simulator.
Frigates: stats change, big deal. As for the bigger ships, same.

Again, you should think beyond not under the current limitations.

 

[Nudl9]

As far as the attack ships go, there's nothing some stats tweaking and gameplay thinking can't do to make them viable.

Sure, but we've been here for 16 years post-TFT and theres been absolutely no changes from the side of Blizzard.
Since there are no and never has been any competitive melee maps with water units i doubt they even care.
You could mitigate some problems by editing game data yourself, but it's generally frowned upon if you're making a melee map.
There have been attempts by modders to fix it, but generally speaking it's clunky, unintuitive and bogs down otherwise great gameplay.

I'm pretty sure the boats were scrapped very early into TFT. I remember reading a post on reddit about it, where boats are not very intuitive for gameplay or something like it. Basicly some units can't attack on water and others can't which creates an unfair advantage. Or when your opponent decides to fight on land where boats can't reach they become obsolete and why would you include obsolete features.

 

[deepstrasz]

Basicly some units can't attack on water and others can't.

!? All ranged units which target ground units target boats. All ground melee units target boats (if they are close enough). Easy as pie, as you need ranged units to attack air units and as ranged air units attack ground units, as magic attack type units can't attack magic immune units and so on.

Or when your opponent decides to fight on land where boats can't reach they become obsolete and why would you include obsolete features.

That's just gameplay. Spell casters become obsolete against magic immune units or non-magic attackers/users against ethereal (Banish/Spirit Form).
You use the ships as long as you need them. Maps can be made in such a way for them to be as useful as possible.
I wonder how naga/amphibious units would work though. Of course, they'd have to be higher tier like air units.

 

[sentrywiz]

XanderD has decided to leave the hiveworkshop and cancel their participation in the contest.

Damn, see ya XanderD.

Don't worry, it's a popularity contest.
Nobody really cares.

Because the people who vote don't play or test the map. How do i know?

I concur. But it shouldn't matter to us in the long run.

Boats can't be properly integrated because the feature is cancer. It's inherently flawed.
Theres a reason nagas, boats got discarded as a multiplayer element with the release of TFT.
It's clunky and creates lots of new imbalance issues.

Transport ships have 1500 hp which is just broken.
If your transport ship gets ensnared and surrounded, everything inside dies - largely Orc favoured.

Seeing how zeppelins behave the same way over water, I'd say the water is buggy.
Which is why most maps utilize shallow water only.

Sure, but we've been here for 16 years post-TFT and theres been absolutely no changes from the side of Blizzard.

More or less. I think I've been playing TFT for ~14 years, and boats never happened, not even in custom maps.
Not even mass strategy maps that have absurd amounts of map size to work with, utilize them well.

To make a "boat" map the maps also need water which means less buildable terrain.
Frigates are basicly paper and not worth the price, because it has light armor which sucks.

I think you're wrong.
Even blizzard thinks you're wrong, frigates description also says "good vs air".
And frigates are so worth it.

Battleships on the other hand, if they were playable in melee setting are the ones that
might not be worth it and are clunky. Especially since their splash is friendly fire.

 

[Nudl9]

You're just playing devils advocate if you want to argue for boats.

Melee game is a game designed around units soft-countering each other. Regardless of what unit compositions each player has you can usually micro your way to victory. There are some hardcounters like air>ground, magic immunity>spell casters, but thats something you play to punish massing. But if you introduce boats you have units that can just run away from a fight or become obsolete the moment units step on land, see my screenshot for good example. So if you have a boat map, you just end buying flying units anyway.

You use the ships as long as you need them.

The moment you don't need them they still take up food slots which is a huge issue, which is why you never want to use them.

Theres a reason why boats aren't in the main game. Regardless of what you think of them it doesn't change the fact that using boats tend to be the worst aspect of most RTS games. It's heavy handed and not fun to use. Even if transport ship is broken as fuck nobody wants to use it because it's clunky.

Even blizzard thinks you're wrong, frigates description also says "good vs air".
And frigates are so worth it.

Uhh no? They have 0 armor and the worst type of armor possible - light armor.
What attack does air units have? piercing.
So frigates are bad vs air.
Frigates are shit.
Also what tooltips say doesn't matter, because blizzard doesn't care about most info written on most units like creeps, campaign units, etc.
You'll start to notice how tardy the developers are once you work long enough with the editor.
I've tested most campaign and units like boats pretty rigorously is my map Warcraft Royale, which is supposed to replicate the fighting aspect from ladder.
So i've got a lot to say about boats.

Less buildable terrain? I don't recall ladder being a kingdom simulator.

It matters because theres less spots for AOW creeping, farm scouting, protecting key checkpoints like shops, AOW>UD harass to tech, moving your main base ancient, mass moon wells in center+warden, placing a shops. It generally limits your options in a bad way. Northeren Isles is an example of a ladder map that has too much water, it doesn't feel good to play on.

 

[sentrywiz]

You're just playing devils advocate if you want to argue for boats.

Melee game is a game designed around units soft-countering each other. Regardless of what unit compositions each player has you can usually micro your way to victory. There are some hardcounters like air>ground, magic immunity>spell casters, but thats something you play to punish massing. But if you introduce boats you have units that can just run away from a fight or become obsolete the moment units step on land, see my screenshot for good example. So if you have a boat map, you just end buying flying units anyway.


The moment you don't need them they still take up food slots which is a huge issue, which is why you never want to use them.

Theres a reason why boats aren't in the main game. Regardless of what you think of them it doesn't change the fact that using boats tend to be the worst aspect of most RTS games. It's heavy handed and not fun to use. Even if transport ship is broken as fuck nobody wants to use it because it's clunky.

Most RTS games don't utilize water. They're in space or on land.
Red Alert games, Warcraft2, Age of Empires utilize water very well.

Which is why I don't like melee in WC3, IMO. People do like it though, and I agree, in standard melee maps
the priorities are different and its not about boats or even using boats. They were never really standardized TFT / ROC feature.


Only in cinematics. The only use was in the Rexxar campaigns, when Kul Tiras was involved.
If Kul Tiras would of made it into the main game back then as it is now in WoW BFA,
things would of been a looooooot different. They would of found a way to make naval work.


Let's play my map then. I think I'll wreck your air armies.

 

[deepstrasz]

There are some hardcounters like air>ground, magic immunity>spell casters, but thats something you play to punish massing.

The same with boats. As I've already mentioned, they should be used as mercenaries, not mass produced.

But if you introduce boats you have units that can just run away from a fight

Like air units can just fly away over destructibles, cliffs, doodads and other units? Boats have their role. They are usually more resistant than air units (except probably Frost Wyrms and Chimaeras if we don't consider Battleships). I really don't see why you fight so much not to have ships in the game. It's not like you're forced to play with them. Heck, even I don't play with all the units in a faction's techtree. I have my favourites.
Sure but, let's have Battleships mid-game to compensate for their later replacement in late game with wyrms and chimaeras.

The moment you don't need them they still take up food slots which is a huge issue, which is why you never want to use them.

Not really. They could actually be good fore defensive means around island expansions etc. But, I was thinking of a way to sell them later on if you'd like (an ability which gives back half or less the amount of resources spent on them).

Regardless of what you think of them it doesn't change the fact that using boats tend to be the worst aspect of most RTS games.

Right, so, I'm supposed to take your words for granted and think like that. No. Boats work quite well in RTS games, they do in Warcraft II and Red Alert, 7 Years War and whichever game has them along with air units.

It's heavy handed and not fun to use. Even if transport ship is broken as fuck nobody wants to use it because it's clunky.

Again, manoeuvrability can be fixed. I don't consider some units fun, especially some from the mercenary camps which are useless apart form having an extra unit faster but that doesn't mean I am forced to use those units.
It's like saying, creeping with AoW is not fun. Well, don't do it. Let others do it. (Tower) rush isn't fun but should it be eliminated?

Uhh no? They have 0 armor and the worst type of armor possible - light armor.

I thought we've gone through this one before. Stats can be changed. For the map I'm working on, I've replaced that with medium.

You'll start to notice how tardy the developers are once you work long enough with the editor.

Wow... as if the idea of this game was the editor in the first place...

It matters because theres less spots for AOW creeping

Less doesn't mean none. Heck even StarCraft had island only maps and that didn't make the game bad. Sure, nobody played ladder on those because the gameplay was obviously mid-late related and 90% dependent on air units.
Maps can be properly made not to have those issues. Take some of yours for instance which have a lot of shallow water.
Not all maps should enable these strategies. If you can use the same tactics on every map, where's the fun in creative stratagem thinking?

Melee units become obsolete against air units. Same deal, only with one way.
The "problem" I'm seeing in your picture is that melee units have an easier time dealing with boats due to much shallow water.

So, let's agree to disagree more.

 

[Nudl9]

I really don't see why you fight so much not to have ships in the game. It's not like you're forced to play with them.

Any feature that isn't used should be scrapped. It's bad game design to leave scraps of features that don't get used. It's ok to have some features that are less used as long as they fill a niche, but boats don't even do that. The problem with leaving excess features in your game is that you're essentially handing out a set of cards, the pros will pick all the good cards because they know better and the noobs will pick cards that aren't top tier and wonder why they lost. When the game can simply hand out decent cards to both players. This is why a game should never be bogged down by too many features.

I thought we've gone through this one before. Stats can be changed. For the map I'm working on, I've replaced that with medium.

Yeah, but you're advocating for a change which is kind of pointless isn't it? Like nobody wants to play melee maps with boats and so there is no incentive for blizzard to balance boats or rework them. They have been left unchanged for 16 years. If you edit the data in the object editor then your map won't qualify for a melee map either, so yeah pointless.

Right, so, I'm supposed to take your words for granted and think like that. No. Boats work quite well in RTS games, they do in Warcraft II and Red Alert, 7 Years War and whichever game has them along with air units.

Boats were easily the worst part of WC2.
Other RTS games come to mind as well: Warlords Battlecry, AoE2.
I haven't played enough Red Alert to have an opinion of it.

I really don't see why you fight so much not to have ships in the game. It's not like you're forced to play with them. Heck, even I don't play with all the units in a faction's techtree. I have my favourites.

Because boats suck and playing with them is not fun. The only thing that matters in a game is how "fun" it is, so yeah if it's not "fun" then don't add it.
If boats suck nobody will buy them meaning it's an excess feature, which again - bad game design.
Now if you were to suddenly make boats good i'd be forced to use them, but they're not fun to use so i don't want them to be good.

It's like saying, creeping with AoW is not fun. Well, don't do it. Let others do it. (Tower) rush isn't fun but should it be eliminated?

If i'm not using AOW to creep, then i'm playing the game less than optimal, now why would i do that?

 

[WolfFarkas]

oh heavens I cant read it all, and more post commings,

-I want to say that my first idea was to use shallow water and shipyards in my map, after @Nudl9 post of boats, I totally discarted the idea.

-about water, I like Red alert 3, water bases, a lot of amphibious units so you can go ground - water with a lot of freedom. and many units have 2 roles.

-since is the 4th melee contest of the Hive site, the poll has to be hosted on the site, but I understand it was linked in discord, redit, whatever, now if user dont come here to vote, we cant force them.
and I think as inside rules of the hive is that contest need a public poll.
Arena - Rules And Guide
3. Poll
When the contest has ended, the poll can start.

-https://www.hiveworkshop.com/threads/melee-mapping-the-reasons-behind-common-aspects-of-competitive-1v1-maps.304710/
I read it, thats why I put the lordaeron merc camp in a black citadel map, still sorry for the red tiles.

 

[deepstrasz]

Any feature that isn't used should be scrapped.

!? it's flawed right now and not even in ladder. How's that going to be used? That's why we're discussing about fixes.

Like nobody wants to play melee maps with boats

You mean ladder players are not accustomed to because it wasn't part of ladder melee from the start. That's totally a different thing. Pros are reluctant to new things because they are too absorbed into what they already know (to exploit).

If you edit the data in the object editor then your map won't qualify for a melee map either, so yeah pointless.

...sure that's totally on point.
Let's see how the new melee changes they did work out. This is how you do it, few steps at a time.

Boats were easily the worst part of WC2.

I fail to see why your opinion should be taken as a general argument.

Because boats suck and playing with them is not fun. The only thing that matters in a game is how "fun" it is, so yeah if it's not "fun" then don't add it.

OK, then don't play games with boats. I think they're fun.

If i'm not using AOW to creep, then i'm playing the game less than optimal, now why would i do that?

Then if boats are powerful then you'll use them even if you don't like them.

 

[Nudl9]

There is nothing to salvage by "fixing boats" here.
It's like making a melee map with imbalanced merc. camps, you just don't do it because the map becomes shit for a certain race.
The general opinion of boats is that they aren't fun to use.
It's only mapmakers that insist on playing them because they want to make special snowflake maps.

Anyway i found the reddit thread that i was thinking of, with the key points i was thinking about.

I’ve heard people explain it by saying that maps with boats just turn into mass-air maps

@floss2xdailywarcraft, WC3 Gym Discord Admin

Also the basically the main defining feature that separates wc3 from other rts is the hero mechanic. If you have naval fights, heroes dont play a role in this. This means that in some way ,adding boats to wc3 would be like going to a triathlon competition and asking the athletes "hey how about a triathlon that consists only of cycling?"

@mafe, judge in this contest lol

According to David Fried (a former Blizzard game designer) the ships of all kinds were planned to return in TFT. This was changed when devs found how hard it's to balance them - ships were OP on maps with a lot of water and useless on maps without it. In addition, AI had some very serious problems with ships as well.

Basicly everything i've been saying this whole time..

Then if boats are powerful then you'll use them even if you don't like them.

Or i just stop playing the game because it's not fun. Thats what happens when the game isn't fun, people stop playing. A lot of players stopped playing melee after 1.30 because the changes blizzard made were so cancerous (KOTG, Giants, etc). The game stopped being fun. The community was upset because the classic games team is incompetent. So yeah introducing boats is a terrible idea, because nobody likes boats and more players will just quit playing the game.

 

[deepstrasz]

Mass air if there's too much water where the boats can hide or something. Else, it's the same with air units. Easiest way to counter is air units.
No one will mass produce ships because maps won't be designed for that and heroes are a priority which will not be neglected. It would be a waste of time to use ships more than they are useful for, some skirmishes, attack from behind the base tactics, transport.

Basicly everything i've been saying this whole time..

There's no context to what he said. Did he mean boats as mercs? Was he referring to Warcraft II type boats?

With all that, it's still inconclusive and needs further testing.

 

[Nudl9]

Theres no context? he was talking about balance and AI problems.
All things i've seen saying up until this point.
I could probably write an essay worth of why boats suck.

There is nothing to test, boat's don't work and aren't fun to use.
Like i don't understand what kind of conclusive evidence you want for why boats are inherently bad and a terrible gameplay mechanic, when you even have a statement from the devs as well.
Boats just aren't inherently interesting in theme either, playing with ground units is just ten times more fun.
So i don't know, like do you want the opinion of 70-80%+ winrate players, because i know some and if you ask their opinion on it they're going to be a lot more blunt about it.

 

[WolfFarkas]

"I’ve heard people explain it by saying that maps with boats just turn into mass-air maps"

Wtii also say it when reviewing a map of the 3rd melee contest, his statement can be found in the youtube channel.

since boats, is like almost talking about @JaleVeliki map.

Vile Reef
I was neutral with his boats, not add him score, but not punish him, I consider it as something that can be removed later to reach ladder.
so the map:
1-I felt that merc. camps could be more far from base, more in a competitive spot.
2-the hydra level 6 as green, I wouldnt do that.
That 2 are the things I remember,

1-what I did like is his expading system, the sea gigants (x3) have pulverice wich really harms militia so, I think it was clever to avoid human multi-expanding.
2-Also liked the goblin shops positions, gob labs, and sea gigants as red creeps.

Hillsbrad Creek
- the only think I did not like was the pure red creep of golems that cant be hit with spells, I would have put some units to be hit by spells.
the only thing I remember I really didnt like. The rest was solid, I like it.

The Consortium.
-the only thing I remember is that you couldnt reach Level 2 by killing 2 creeps, if I remember well.
-I could loot a permanent Level 4 and buy a another permanent Level 4 just in spot, I got 2 aura items in a row by chance. perhaps a charged level 3 or a charged level 4 would be better IMO.
The rest was solid IMO and I like the map.

Guardians
1- didnt like tavern area, water, no farm options.
2-not my favorite expanding system, didnt like center goldmines shape, but expading is posible.

1- I did like the center marketplaces, mana fountains, gob shops
2-I liked the gob labs in competitive spots.
3- I like green creeps near tavern.
I like the map, the enviroment.

5

my fith vote was for the map that is no longer in contest, I prefer to not talk about that map in any form.

those are the maps I voted, and did it mindfully considering balance, and compare 1 map against other, of course when maps have bugs, is subjetive wich bugs weigh more. I penalice more agro, than a safe neutral building near base as example.
And to me the expanding system is the main key to consider above almost everything else,
is like when I play I am just thinking in creep the expansion, build a tower in the expansion and then expand.
but perhaps another way of thinking could be consider the goblin shop as key.

 

[sentrywiz]

Right, so, I'm supposed to take your words for granted and think like that. No. Boats work quite well in RTS games, they do in Warcraft II and Red Alert, 7 Years War and whichever game has them along with air units.

You tell em.

Because boats suck and playing with them is not fun. The only thing that matters in a game is how "fun" it is, so yeah if it's not "fun" then don't add it.
If boats suck nobody will buy them meaning it's an excess feature, which again - bad game design.
Now if you were to suddenly make boats good i'd be forced to use them, but they're not fun to use so i don't want them to be good.

To each their own.

oh heavens I cant read it all, and more post commings,

I feel ya Rag.

So i don't know, like do you want the opinion of 70-80%+ winrate players, because i know some and if you ask their opinion on it they're going to be a lot more blunt about it.

Boats are bad in melee maps, you don't need a pro to figure that out.
IT would take a lot of fixes for them to even be remotely viable.
And its just a tad bit too late for that.

My hopes lie in reforged.

@deepstrasz - are you making a naval melee? I'd play that.

 

[deepstrasz]

are you making a naval melee? I'd play that.

No. I'm working on a campaign.
You can however test this map I've edited for expanding melee purposes:
Making Neutral Melee Assets Viable for Ladder+Others
I still need to balance the ships though and well, the terrain isn't too friendly for them either.

 

[-Manuel-]

Well, my playing/developing skill for melee maps are poor, but for me the most good looking and the map that which i would play it's the Underground Oasis.

His atmosphere its unique, remind me a bit to Un'goro crater.

Well done.

 

[Khaldaiel]

I kind of feel a lot of hate and anger in the whole argument... And also a lot of disdain...

- First of all, there is an originality note in the map current scoring system. Trying out things that people are not used to, is usually what people call 'originality'. Defending always the same build/maps because they are optimal is NOT a quality. It's call stalling... it becomes boring. That's why I don't see why we should not try to add these features that are 'unbalanced' or 'not fit for melee'. Being able to renew itself is a great mark of a living game... and let's be honest, I like war3, but it has been kind of dying until the last couple of years when blizzard looked into refreshing it again (with balance patches for example).

- Secondly, 'unbalanced', 'optimality','melee' depends on the current meta/patch/mappool, and the game has evolved in the last 15 years, and it will evolve again, as it was promised with Warcraft3 reforged, which is a good part of this contest's context. Same thing, 'not fit for melee' depends on how we play melee. I don't see why we should play melee the same way we always did... Not wanting the game to change is weird : it has already... and it is still changing. It is what makes it alive.

- And last, this is a contest open to everyone... including pro melee player. If they are not here in that big of a number, it's probably because they don't want to create maps and change the melee they know as much as "noob like us" want to.
A game is not popular because pro player are playing it. A game is popular because a mass of "noob players" do like the game and because they are finding what the pro player do to be very cool... which makes the latter able to live out of their training. If pro player are doing boring repetitive things, less experimented players will leave the game, and pro player will leave as well because they won't be able to make a living of it... So... just refusing everything that pro don't do is ... shortsighted. The game is not only made by the pros and for the pros. "Noobs" have their word to say about it and that's why I don't see why @Nudl9 you find yourself offended by the fact that non-pro mapmakers are doing non-pro map and rating them with their "non-pro" point of view. In fact, I think that's the whole point of this contest. pro mapmaker doing pro maps rated by pros : only blizzard staff can do that. The only reason the juges are pro is to make sure we don't just all make excessively weird maps... But between excessively weird maps and lost_temple3.0 , there is a big gap that we (I think) are trying to fix.

 

[Nudl9]

I'm not offended at all, because i'm not the one making melee maps with boats lol.
All i've done is stated the irrefutable fact that boats are trash and that people shouldn't use them in their map.
If you're offended by what i have to say i advise reading my critisms about boats because theres a large truthbomb right there.
I said it during the the start of the contest as well, so it's not like i didn't warn people earlier.
But i have no qualms saying that boat maps are trash.

I kind of feel a lot of hate and anger in the whole argument... And also a lot of disdain...

Maybe because i spoke too loudly.
Boats are trash, people used them and the truth hurts.
If you don't like what i have to say, again read my original post.

...........

Anyway i wouldn't mind discussing non-boat topics, because i'm tired of continuing to beat on a dead horse.

First of all, there is an originality note in the map current scoring system. Trying out things that people are not used to, is usually what people call 'originality'.

Yes, but you shouldn't take the uniqueness too literally. Is the use of outland tileset original? eh not really, it's a tileset players generally dislike. Using new creep types? Well we use a lot ogres and trolls for a reason. Players sort of know the math and how strong these units are, which is why they're used over and over again across all maps. So if you want to be a hipster and throw new units or tilesets into the mix you have to thread carefully. Because experimenting = more likely to fail

The only reason the juges are pro is to make sure we don't just all make excessively weird maps...

Except people are making wierd maps and one of the judges is incompetent and will probably give points for wierd gimmick maps. So i will throw critisism where is see fit.

Defending always the same build/maps because they are optimal is NOT a quality. It's call stalling... it becomes boring.

Introducing boats and different merc. camps will ruin the competetive integrity of the game. Pro players want consistency. If you start introducing non-standard creeps they won't know how strong these creep camps are. Again i can't stress enough why people should read mafe's guide, he is one of the judges after all.

Same thing, 'not fit for melee' depends on how we play melee. I don't see why we should play melee the same way we always did... Not wanting the game to change is weird : it has already... and it is still changing. It is what makes it alive.

These aren't things you can change. It's right there in the rules for the contest. If you don't follow Blizzards Melee Map Standards, your map is not eligible for BNET ladder. Your point about change is well.. lots of players will stop playing the game if you change too much too fast. Players dropped WC3 with 1.30 because they were upset, a lot of players dropped DOTA2 with the introduction of skill trees and i could go on about how poor decision making by developers caused a drop in players. A good game doesn't need changes and WC3 is one of those that have been played consistently for many years. So no changes aren't inherently good or even something people want. Super Smash Bros. Melee is a game that was released the same year as ROC and people still play it, even though there hasn't been a single patch since release.

If pro player are doing boring repetitive things, less experimented players will leave the game

Pros doing boring metastuff every game? Sounds like any competetive game.

 

[deepstrasz]

And the quote of the year goes to:

experimenting = more likely to fail

Glad humanity experimented so as not to still live in caves and stuff.

 

[Nudl9]

Uhh yeah it's pretty obvious that if you try to experiment, most of your attempts will fail.
Until you find something new that works, which is why you experiment.

So if you make an experimental map, well guess what it's probably going to fail.
Just look at the current map poll and you'll see that the truth lies in the pudding.

 

[WolfFarkas]

I'm not offended at all, because i'm not the one making melee maps with boats lol.
All i've done is stated the irrefutable fact that boats are trash and that people shouldn't use them in their map.
If you're offended by what i have to say i advise reading my critisms about boats because theres a large truthbomb right there.
I said it during the the start of the contest as well, so it's not like i didn't warn people earlier.
But i have no qualms saying that boat maps are trash.


Maybe because i spoke too loudly.
Boats are trash, people used them and the truth hurts.
If you don't like what i have to say, again read my original post.

...........

Anyway i wouldn't mind discussing non-boat topics, because i'm tired of continuing to beat on a dead horse.

Yes, but you shouldn't take the uniqueness too literally. Is the use of outland tileset original? eh not really, it's a tileset players generally dislike. Using new creep types? Well we use a lot ogres and trolls for a reason. Players sort of know the math and how strong these units are, which is why they're used over and over again across all maps. So if you want to be a hipster and throw new units or tilesets into the mix you have to thread carefully. Because experimenting = more likely to fail


Except people are making wierd maps and one of the judges incompetent and will probably give points for wierd gimmick maps. So i will throw critisism where is see fit.


Introducing boats and different merc. camps will ruin the competetive integrity of the game. Pro players want consistency. If you start introducing non-standard creeps they won't know how strong these creep camps are. Again i can't stress enough why people should read mafe's guide, he is one of the judges after all.


These aren't things you can change. It's right there in the rules for the contest. If you don't follow Blizzards Melee Map Standards, your map is not eligible for BNET ladder. Your point about change is well.. lots of players will stop playing the game if you change too much too fast. Players dropped WC3 with 1.30 because they were upset, a lot of players dropped DOTA2 with the introduction of skill trees and i could go on about how poor decision making by developers caused a drop in players. A good game doesn't need changes and WC3 is one of those that have been played consistently for many years. So no changes aren't inherently good or even something people want. Super Smash Bros. Melee is a game that was released the same year as ROC and people still play it, even though there hasn't been a single patch since release.


Pros doing boring metastuff every game? Sounds like any competetive game.

since you quoted mafe tutorial twice:

"Why each player should have an expansion that is clearly closer to him than to the enemy, so that humans can reliably expand.

The reasons here is one matchup: human vs undead. As of 1.28 (and the patchnotes of 1.29 wont make much of a change), this matchup is normally unwinnable for humans in a 1base vs 1base situation, assuming players of about equal skill. "

thats why I couldnt digest the expanding system of Terrace field, and is somehow similar on my map Frostfloe Deep where from 4 expandings, 3 are near to the proper players and 1 is in competition.

the people of discord pointed me that not all the players could expand confortably and equally talking, 3 expand safe, 1 expand more exposed, also they dont like to guess wich mine belongs to wich user, is like the map should be in such form that , that goldmine is to that player.

In my map I put the more weak creep in the more far away expo to compensate the distance.
In terrace field the creeps where Level 30, wich I think is hard to creep it alone and with high chance of creep- jacking
(probably the idea is creep in coperation, I wanted that in my 4v4 and they didnt like that at all, they wanted solo creeping)

Cigaro complained of my level 26 creep with a revenant level 6, you have the level 10 dragon in a level 30 creep!!
also the people of Discord complained about my level 17-18 hard creeps in expanding goldmines for a 4v4 map, so a level 30 in a 2v2, no thanks)
another thing they didnt like is the straight foward pathing from enemy base to enemy base,

I would also like some AOW options in the gob lab , gob shop, merc camp for NE players , Orange liked to AOW the gob lab in Terenas Stand map.
(about the merc camp, you can build but I wouldnt risk build to near the creeps, If I loose the ancient of war while building it, thats it)


I can be wrong or missing something (because there are tons of things that I dont know, and I am no pro), or maybe you tested the map and worked perfectly as you wanted.

but I considered that tutorial ,Discord feedback from the 3rd melee contest, and the expanding goldmine system as a key point, and also pm with some others users about maps before voting.

still I would have voted Terrace Field map, I like the map, since is very solid in many points, I like the marketplace, tavern positions. But well only could vote 5 maps and I had to exclude others.

All this is subjetive but I put effort before voting.

 

[Nudl9]

The reasons here is one matchup: human vs undead. As of 1.28 (and the patchnotes of 1.29 wont make much of a change), this matchup is normally unwinnable for humans in a 1base vs 1base situation, assuming players of about equal skill. "

Maybe in 1v1, but not in 2v2.
I don't remember the exact meta, but i think it's something like: UD+NE > fastexpand NE then feed UD tech T3.
There are some exceptions like Avalance where you want to play HU and double gold mine, im not sure if Blizzard HU double mining on that map in LV, but that was a pretty fun aspect of that map.

We've both made different type of maps, so different rules apply.

I made my map in close relation with Sexytime and Gusch (2v2 expert), two players who play 2v2 frequently and sit on a comfortable 80% and i think 75% - winrate respectively.
Since i didn't know the first thing about 2v2 maps i asked about 2v2 meta and for some good reference maps for inspiration.
I took inspiration from avalance and synergy, since those are maps where players actually work together and were considered very fun.
There is also a starved market for maps with close, but not too close main bases, so thats something i took into consideration as well.
What i came up with was the layout of a centralised expansion that both players would work towards and defend.
If you watch some gameplay videos you'll see that most fights are centered around expansion and thats where the fun lies, lots of back and forth fighting.
Should the game run longer players will take advantage of the fountain or the hard expansions.

Cigaro complained of my level 26 creep with a revenant level 6, you have the level 10 dragon in a level 30 creep!!

Well ok so theres two things.
1# Your map is smaller, the run distance to the enemy base is shorter and so the overall game length will be lower on average.
Thats why you can't use the same level of difficulty on camps that i can. Personally i would have lowered it to 20 so that you could expand earlier. As double mines are pretty fun (see Avalance non-LV).
2# The placement of your doublemine camp makes you want to run there with militia, but revenant 6 has chain lightning which wrecks them.

A red level 30 camp might seem hard, but i've playtested pretty rigorously with feedback from several levels of players:

Gusch 75ish, almost only plays 2v2
Sexytime 80%, 4v4 and 1v1 player
Wtii, streamer, good at general know-how
Dandaelpanda, streamer - decent skill
Notrix streamer, streamer - decent skill

So i used those people a lot for testing.
The feedback i got was that a 26 camp was a little too easy.
Since the game kind of naturally progress towards you having large armies by the time you want a second expansion.
Anyway during playtesting it was crept fairly often so it's never been a problem during any of the games.
So it feels pretty natural to take down as the game progresses.

 

[WolfFarkas]

Maybe in 1v1, but not in 2v2.
I don't remember the exact meta, but i think it's something like: UD+NE > fastexpand NE then feed UD tech T3.
There are some exceptions like Avalance where you want to play HU and double gold mine, im not sure if Blizzard HU double mining on that map in LV, but that was a pretty fun aspect of that map.

We've both made different type of maps, so different rules apply.

I made my map in close relation with Sexytime and Gusch (2v2 expert), two players who play 2v2 frequently and sit on a comfortable 80% and i think 75% - winrate respectively.
Since i didn't know the first thing about 2v2 maps i asked about 2v2 meta and for some good reference maps for inspiration.
I took inspiration from avalance and synergy, since those are maps where players actually work together and were considered very fun.
There is also a starved market for maps with close, but not too close main bases, so thats something i took into consideration as well.
What i came up with was the layout of a centralised expansion that both players would work towards and defend.
If you watch some gameplay videos you'll see that most fights are centered around expansion and thats where the fun lies, lots of back and forth fighting.
Should the game run longer players will take advantage of the fountain or the hard expansions.


Well ok so theres two things.
1# Your map is smaller, the run distance to the enemy base is shorter and so the overall game length will be lower on average.
Thats why you can't use the same level of difficulty on camps that i can. Personally i would have lowered it to 20 so that you could expand earlier. As double mines are pretty fun (see Avalance non-LV).
2# The placement of your doublemine camp makes you want to run there with militia, but revenant 6 has chain lightning which wrecks them.

A red level 30 camp might seem hard, but i've playtested pretty rigorously with feedback from several levels of players:

So i used those people a lot for testing.
The feedback i got was that a 26 camp was a little too easy.
Since the game kind of naturally progress towards you having large armies by the time you want a second expansion.
Anyway during playtesting it was crept fairly often so it's never been a problem during any of the games.
So it feels pretty natural to take down as the game progresses.

such level of info, I would have never guess it, is like have a russian book and need a translator to understand it.

now I feel that compite against you, is like a battleship against an aircraft carrier in WWII.
The battleship(me) is just a sitting duck and has no chance.

 

[Nudl9]

It's not that complicated.
Anyone can do it.
As long as you actively try to seek out information, you can learn quickly.
I've never done melee maps before this contest and so i started out with mafe's guide.
Then i looked at some of the maps in the ladder pool, 1v1's and 2v2's - most popular tilesets, creeps, items.
You can draw a lot of information from making observations.
For example there are reoccuring trends with a particular camps reappearing (x2 trapper+ogre3), shop camps tend to be 16-18 with charged 3 drop.
In general you want to look at stuff like base distance to trees and other such details.
Though take this tip with a grain of salt because some the new maps suck: LV maps (almost all of them), Northeren Isles, Plunder Isle, Tirisfal Glades. Some actual good maps have been changed for the worse as well such as Terenas Stand and Murlocs Oasis.

What you should also do is just ask people.
Go on reddit, discords (this list is invalueable) or just ask streamers - ask around.
The more specific the questions the better.
For example you could have asked about the creep level on the goldmines if you weren't sure.

Also testing.
Test your map against computers or other players, even if you're shit at melee, you'll always find something to improve or errors that your glossed over.
I think getting other players to test your map is the hardest part.
Like i even struggle with getting one random player for a 1v1 and even then they drop good feedback at the end.
So yeah i don't know if theres a way to get tester reliably.
I guess i'm pretty lucky to have made contacts with some good players.

Learning melee and playing it is of course also a good way to learn to make melee maps, something i started with after the contest started. There are things you simply won't understand until you actually play the game.

 

[mafe]

I dont have the time to get involved in this discussion currently.

But since my guide is being quoted: I intended it to explicitly be a guide for 1v1 maps. Some of this still applies to 2v2, but not necesssarily all of it.

 

[JaleVeliki]

To make a "boat" map the maps also need water which means less buildable terrain.
Frigates are basicly paper and not worth the price, because it has light armor which sucks.
The siege boat is OP as fuck if the map has any bases exposed water.

Vile Reef has no frigates or battleships, only transport ships are purchasable. They can be used to scout a lot of the map if not for transport. They can be used in many ways none of the maps with boats have done so far, especially melee. Units wont die in boats because there isn't a place where deep water is surrounded by 300 range, so the units will 99% survive. Zeppelin units will also die if above deep water. You can defend your boat(s) with anti air. There isnt a whole lot of deep water. There is also a boat-less version for those who deem boats to be overpowered and want to play 1v1 / 2v2 / FFA on it 'properly', but from the Russian tournaments that Vile Reef was played on, boats weren't all that powerful after all and the matches were dictated by the layout.

Sure, but we've been here for 16 years post-TFT and theres been absolutely no changes from the side of Blizzard.

That's because nobody experimented to see how boats can be utilized in other ways than just reaching an island (some nice ideas on Thawing Snow) and this is the type of thing Blizzard wants before Reforged. Boats will likely NOT remain the same. Also, what makes you think Blizz will automatically throw top contest maps into ladder or that we decide anything?

Secondly, 'unbalanced', 'optimality','melee' depends on the current meta/patch/mappool

The game is in a constant stage of evolution, especially now that balance changes aren't out of the question as before. Don't live in 2002. It's time to explore. Touch unused wc3 potential for melee.

This entire discussion is pointless, you are not proving anything to anyone of us here, except lakes of salt.

 

[Nudl9]

Well excuse me for actually discussing about the maps and the poll.
If you don't like dicussing then don't participate.

The problem with transport ships is that they have 1500 hp. If you have one in combat and load units it's a safe haven for wounded units and it's hard to deal with. Like dodging flamestrikes, blizzard - these spells become almost obsolete because of the boats massive hp. Then again players still won't ships because of clunkiness. The way it loads units is unintuitive, because they won't meet each other halfway, but instead one will stand still. Zeppelins share the same problem, but this is less relevant since it's flying and won't get obstructed by pathing. Also like i said earlier orcs with Ensnare surround will kill all of your units since they have no place to land. Because boats have large collision, awful pathfinding and bad turnspeed it's really easy to do it. Ensnared ships can't unload units. If your surround with a 12+ food army everything dies and it's a game over. So very Orc favoured. I have boats in my map Warcraft Royale, which is supposed to replicate some of the fighting aspect from melee. It has happend there on several occasions. So i'm talking from experience here. I've done several things in that map to "fix" boats, but you can't really fix something that is inherently flawed.

 

[WolfFarkas]

It's not that complicated.
Anyone can do it.
As long as you actively try to seek out information, you can learn quickly.
I've never done melee maps before this contest and so i started out with mafe's guide.
Then i looked at some of the maps in the ladder pool, 1v1's and 2v2's - most popular tilesets, creeps, items.
You can draw a lot of information from making observations.
For example there are reoccuring trends with a particular camps reappearing (x2 trapper+ogre3), shop camps tend to be 16-18 with charged 3 drop.
In general you want to look at stuff like base distance to trees and other such details.
Though take this tip with a grain of salt because some the new maps suck: LV maps (almost all of them), Northeren Isles, Plunder Isle, Tirisfal Glades. Some actual good maps have been changed for the worse as well such as Terenas Stand and Murlocs Oasis.

What you should also do is just ask people.
Go on reddit, discords (this list is invalueable) or just ask streamers - ask around.
The more specific the questions the better.
For example you could have asked about the creep level on the goldmines if you weren't sure.

Also testing.
Test your map against computers or other players, even if you're shit at melee, you'll always find something to improve or errors that your glossed over.
I think getting other players to test your map is the hardest part.
Like i even struggle with getting one random player for a 1v1 and even then they drop good feedback at the end.
So yeah i don't know if theres a way to get tester reliably.
I guess i'm pretty lucky to have made contacts with some good players.

Learning melee and playing it is of course also a good way to learn to make melee maps, something i started with after the contest started. There are things you simply won't understand until you actually play the game.

Test your map against computers or other players, even if you're shit at melee, you'll always find something to improve or errors that your glossed over.

that I did, and in the twich video, I was surprised that some things worked better that I would imagine.
an orc player hijacked with the tauren hero the enemy orc blademaster in a green near base, I would never try that, and it worked.
and in the game-play those who rush Tier 2 like troll mass win against a clumsy that is unwisely going to Tier 3
and Tier 2 rush can be counter, and then the tier 3 can overpower against the tier 2, if the tier 2 fails to defeat the enemy early.
I would never imagine all that by the beta test I did wich was more focus in detect agro and test AOW creeping.
In my map I only had in mind 2 ways of play, coperative expandings, and solo expandings, but in the twich video much more complex strategies came aboard, like rush tier 3 and not expand, never considered that.
I was so glad when the user that was rushin tier 3 said it was a good time killing.
and even red tiles arent good ones, they praised my gray fog because it makes the red less red and less shynny. the mix red-green seems to be very good, but since I wasnt shure, I prefer to use it in low amount in case it fails.

I think getting other players to test your map is the hardest part.

yup I didnt want to bother other people with all this,(since many where very busy), well I bothered 1-2 users with my map and did some fixing as example originally you couldnt get L2 with 2 creeps, that I fixed,.

by the way, you didnt vote in the poll, you did?

there is a map or maps from another users that you liked in this contest??

 

[deepstrasz]

by the way, you didnt vote in the poll, you did?

there is a map or maps from another users that you liked in this contest??

Maybe, he's more of a miser than Keito

 

[Nudl9]

I didn't vote because i'm too lazy to open up or test maps.
So it would be unfair of me to vote just based on map previews.

Though I'd probably favor Hillbrads Creek.
I think it's a bit standard, the other maps are more interesting, but they lack polish so... Henci's map.

King and Country comes to mind. I like the layout, visuals. I haven't played it, but it looks like fights can occur anywhere on the map. It's just the polish stuff should have been fixed like creep aggro. Not too happy about the rock tiles on the hill expansions, it really restricts where you can build in a way that isn't good. There should only have been rock tiles near the ramp to prevent cannon tower spam.

Vile Reef: Good layout, but you know my stance on ships. The rain adds too much visual clutter i think.

Underground Oasis: It's obvious this map was never playtested, air blockers near the archways screw up pathing for ground units. This isn't immediately obvious for new mapmakers. You can force the ground units through, but it really screws with pathingfinding if you click the other side. So a simple playtest would have fixed it. I just find it a bit lazy and a bit wierd too given the effort with the terrain and concept - which is pretty solid. When hi2chaco was testing it he was questioning wether you wanted to do this purpose rofl.

edit: on closer inspect there are more things that drag it down, aggro, waygates, mana fountains..

The rest of the maps falls into a non-specific category of problems with tilesets: too much red, too much orange, too much blue, too dark, broken drops, too heavy fog, too large maps, creep aggro, wierd creeps, tiles being eyesore, floating doodads, militia rush. I'm pretty quick to dismiss maps on that basis.

Also i want to like Guardians, but man that map has so many problems. Which i'm not gonna adress them because people have already done so.

 

[W3Sour]

I like Guardians, Hills Creek, Consortium, Terrace Field. All have problems though, no map is without flaws here.

Nice to see Synergy being used as a reference point

 

[Nudl9]

We should just let XanderD judge, he's doing all the work for Hi2chaco lmao.
He doesn't what to do without anyone telling him whats good or bad with a map.

 

[Heinvers]

Status?

 

[WolfFarkas]

Status?

I was going to ask the same, but didnt want to put preasure.

@mafe

so everything ok?, how are you and the other judges doing?, do you have an ETA (estimated time of arrive) of the results?

 

[JaleVeliki]

are you guys planning a trip?
chill pill! results/updates will come when ready...

 

[WolfFarkas]

Status?

are you guys planning a trip?
chill pill! results/updates will come when ready...

results cant be ready without the check in of the mods Naze and or Heinvers, it is their work to do the maths score + poll and also control that everything is ok,
so is fair and also it is part of his duty that Heinvers is asking status of this contest.

 

[mafe]

Well, for me it is a case of Hofstadter's law - Wikipedia

I think I'm about 70-80% done writing my reviews, but the last 20-30% will still take some finetuning.
I dont want to speak about an ETA, as I am not the only judge. My goal is to have my reviews ready ideally be the end of this month (i.e. to take as much time for reviewing as you had for mapping), or at least no later than a single-digit June date.

I know from being a participant myself that everyone would like to have the results out soon, but sometimes you gotta be patient

 

[Blood Raven]

Wassup?

 

[Arrr]

wassup? x2

 

[mafe]

We're working on it. But again, I dont want to make promises that other people have to keep.

 

[mafe]

Good news for all you patient people : Results will be out on sunday, or possibly earlier if I find enough time.

 

[Rockstar356]

Great news! can't wait!!

 

[mafe]

The wait is finally over:
Melee Mapping contest #4: 2v2 - Results

For further discussion, please move over to the results thread.
This thread will be closed soon.