Roses Of Forgotten

[LordDz]

Can't test due to not being on a computer with Wc3, but from what I could tell one of the creep camps doesn't drop any items.

Generally in Warcraft 3 melee maps all creep camps drop items, so shouldn't the quilboars also drop items?
Terrain looks good from what I can tell from the screenshots.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Can't test due to not being on a computer with Wc3, but from what I could tell one of the creep camps doesn't drop any items.

Generally in Warcraft 3 melee maps all creep camps drop items, so shouldn't the quilboars also drop items?
Terrain looks good from what I can tell from the screenshots.

They all drop items, but by the time when I took the screenshots, I set it game mode so the whole things such as item drops and camp settings appear hidden. Thank you for your reply

Ah, as for the quilboars, it was intentional. The sum level was only 5, so they do not drop anything.

 

[Paillan]

Well, my review may be a bit harsh, as melee maps are not my butter. I guess the terrain is okay, for melee, of course I have nothing to say about gameplay. Creep camps seem okay, the location of some mines seems more convenient than others. Also, I think that the two bases are a bit too close, but that's just me. Everything is... standard though, nothing that moves my interest at all, but I guess that is common in melee maps.
Maybe you could add a bit more backstory to that description... it's a bit shortish.
Anyway, I guess I will give a 2.5/5 which makes 3/5 in round numbers. Approved.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Thanks for the review, and I got something to say.

You gave me practically 2.5/5, and you know that is 50%, which is F.
F is the kind of the score you get when you have a huge critical flaw in your work
that it is deemed 'not working' or 'inappropriate'

Yes, I would gladly accept 'F' if you pointed out a critical error that hugely ruins the game play,
but your whole review is like,

"well, it looks okay, i'm not an expert at melee, so I can't tell, but it looks like it's okay. Hmm.. but there is nothing interesting as all other melee... well.."


You said, "nothing that moves my interest at all, but I guess that is common in melee maps."
and this is being very impolite. Why would you even review a melee map when you think melee is nothing interesting?
You wanted to see a fancy landscape filled with custom doodads like in RPG maps?

Since you are talking about a melee map, you should be judging things by melee standards, not by RPG's,
but I see the reasons of your disappointment is this map contains nothing 'un-melee'
and you would give 2.5 to any map that fails to escape melee standard.


Again, I would gladly accept your 'F' if you give me a detailed explanation about how this map is not working, and
what kind of critical strategic flaws it has. And you would have to be very confident, not like "but that's me"
You can't just give me 2.5 for a melee map not having fancy landscape.

 

[Paillan]

well, melee doesn't mean you can't have a fancy landscape, does it? also, it's not like I am rejecting your map. Score doesn't mean that you pass or not (although scores under 2 well...) it's more than that. It meets criteria too be approved? Yes. Does it have something to set it apart from other melee? No.
That was pretty much my criteria. And remember, in the end, since I have to give you a round number, I gave you 3/5. Wich is middle normal score. Nothing bad, no flaws, but also very, plain. Which yes, makes sense in a melee map.
So again, making a melee map doesn't mean your terrain can't be good. Of course if you don't like my review that's perfectly fine. The first thing I told you was "I feel biased against melee". I am also not forcing you to change the terrain if you don't want too, it's up to you.

 

[MysteryMaze]

I understand your meaning.
But what makes me really confused is, you're the only one to say my terrain is not fancy.
When I revealed this in a melee community, it was high praised. Even by tournament organizers.
The landscape was judged as even to blizzards or nearly blizzards.

I'm not talking about this single map only.
Rocky Mountain
Read this post and see what others would say.
Even that highly praised map holds less aesthetic value than this one,
and you call it not fancy.

I am curious as to know which melee map you regard fancy. Can you name one please?


And this whole stuff is not to say that you should judge maps by the same criteria as others,
but to say your review has to hold some objectivity since you are a reviewer.

"You shouldn't review and score maps you are biased against"

 

[Paillan]

Paucity I actually like this terrain much more, and it's yours so...
Now, this is NOT a melee community, is it now? when we compare maps, you have to compete with non-melee maps as well. Since that would be incredible unfair for melee maps (because of gameplay/triggers only), those 2 categories are immediately given too you as an advantage. Terrain however is another story, as you don't have to keep a melee terrain to have a melee map. Then again that also doesn't means you have to fill your map with imported.
As said before, this map is middle road. Maybe somebody else would have gave it 4/5, but I doubt it.
And you can't say my score is bad either way, I still gave you 3/5. Were you expecting 5/5?
As a note, your other map is much more appealing to the eyes. Maybe it's the colors of the map after all, but there's little you can do about that.

 

[MysteryMaze]

Yes, fancy maps could be made without filling the map with imported stuffs.

Like these.
(I don't know if you find them fancy or not, but I find them to be)

but once you create your map like this,
that is not melee.

Unlike non-melee maps, melee has its own strict shape and outline.
Even a minor departure from a melee shape is enough to make players feel "This is not melee"
and I try my best to keep the map within melee boundary.


My opinion is melee should not be judged by the same criteria as non-melee,
as each genre has its own traits. judging criteria cannot transcend that line.

Among non-melee, yes, they should be evaluated upon the same standard whatever the type is,
but there is a clear line between melee and non-melee.
The gap is as huge as melee storm-bolt and non-melee storm-bolt type fancy trigger skill

Like you said, this is not a melee community.
But when judging melee, melee standard should be applied.
Understanding the characteristics of each genre is also an important part of review.

 

[Paillan]

Which is exactly why I gave you 3/5. Because it's a melee genre map. It has strict rules, it cannot compete with non-melee maps. But that also means I can give you 5/5 just because you made an normal melee map.

 

[MysteryMaze]

I know in Warcraft melee is very outdated and out of fashion, but your comment is pretty discouraging. Let's put it this way.
Say you put a lot of effort in making a Starcraft 1 map, and somebody comes in and say
I give you 3/5 because Starcraft 1 is no longer competitive with Starcraft 2.
How would it feel?

 

[Paillan]

I know in Warcraft melee is very outdated and out of fashion, but your comment is pretty discouraging. Let's put it this way.
Say you put a lot of effort in making a Starcraft 1 map, and somebody comes in and say
I give you 3/5 because Starcraft 1 is no longer competitive with Starcraft 2.
How would it feel?

Probably bad but I would understand it never the less. I could give you more score if your map lived up to it's name (it's supposed to have some kind of connection with Roses. Maybe make some dead roses and stuff??)

 

[MysteryMaze]

Probably bad but I would understand it never the less. I could give you more score if your map lived up to it's name (it's supposed to have some kind of connection with Roses. Maybe make some dead roses and stuff??)

I will consider that. Maybe put some roses as main theme. Thank you for your opinion.
It was a meaningful discussion I think.

 

[Paillan]

No problem bro