The Glade

[Moderator]

23:12, 27th Oct 2014
StoPCampinGn00b: Map approved with a 4/5 rating.

As the official judge of the "Melee Map Making Contest #1," I have showcased PKCrafty's expert review below.

PKCrafty's review

I must start off with saying; good job on the item drops. The item drops are as they should be, very balanced. I commend you on this, for I have played so many custom melee maps with imbalanced item drops. The item ranges for each creep are as they should be, once again well done.

This map seems professionally made for competitive gameplay. The pathing is nice and smooth - nice open areas and good choke points. And this of course includes the layout, well done, it seems as if this map was made by Blizzard®. The neutral buildings are well placed with good pathing and surroundings around the neutral buildings. Not only that but you left the tavern unguarded (it should seem pointless to point this out, but I've seen a lot of maps make the mistake of guarding the tavern.) and this map has a goblin merchant. Both these buildings are a must in competitive maps.

The map is well balanced for each and every race, something I don't see often.


Maybe increase starting goldmines up to 12500 instead of all being 10000; since the map is so small and there is the option for 3 people to be playing at once.
Also I noticed the creep camps sight/range are at 500 instead of the standard 200 for the expansions. The main reason why it is set to 200 is for proxy building; such as AoW(Ancient of War) creeping as nightelf, putting up proxy voodoo lounge as orc. (for a stronger harass/pressure) Or human making scout farms to detect opponent movement across the map. I saw you set the range for all the other camps to 200, so I'm at a lost as why the expansions are 500. I'm interested in knowing your thoughts behind this.

Now the terrain is up to par with blizzard standards, along with creeps, amount of expansions, item drops, pathing, layout, and overall balancing. In my book that's a 5/5 rating based on that.
The terrain has excellent tile variation with well placed doodads giving the map a well and strong swamp/glade lively atmosphere. The map is very pretty and beautiful islands on the outside of the map. Although this is not really important in competitive maps, but still, it is a very nice touch nonetheless.


"Look at dat, a "non symmentrical" 3 player map. Hard to copy n paste, since you can't rotate 120 degress in the editor." Well I beg to differ. This is as symmetrical as you could possibly get in a 3-player map. Well done.

Did not find any bugs or flaws in the map.

Do not really have any suggestions except increasing the mainbase gold and decreasing creep camps sight/range (but if you left it at 500 on purpose with a reason, that's fine). Other than that the map is well-made. I mean, I could suggest other things, but they're more of a personal preference/style.

Overall the map is well balanced and could play at a high competitive skill level, such as myself. You sir deserve +rep with a rating of 5/5. Hope to see more maps from you, such at this high caliber of quality.

Contact me if you have any questions.

As a veteran melee map maker, I have also included Remixer's review.

Remixer's Review

Cons:
1. Floating doodads (rocks, sunken ruins rubble (small) all around the middle island (next/on the cliff). You should either raise the doodads or remove/rescale them so that they dong hang off the edge.

2. The shallow water area is very flat, try to get some height variation in there raise and lower the ground, but keep the type shallow water.

3. The tile usage in the shallow water area could use more dirt and rough dirt and less grass, since grass rarely grows underwater.

4. A bit minor detail but it's still sticking in my eye, there is a lamp (totem lantern) behind the trees at the North-East part of the center island, I think it's "a terraining typo" since it looks really out of place there.

5. The doodads are very stacked all across the map, what I mean that there is a lot of them but most of them are in a bunches of e.g. 10 rocks and lots of shrubs and mushrooms and on the way to the next pile there is no doodads. This style should be avoided since having smoothly decorated terrain is mostly a better way since having the piled style often leaves the rest of the terrain really empty looking (like in this case) ( I am still having this issue myself a little, but I'm working on fixing it ).

6. I am not sure about this one since a lot of people do it, but in my eyes the waterfalls starting from the side of the cliff (or above them) looks really strange, I think the best way to fix this would be to remove the waterfalls since there is rarely water falls in the sea anyway.

7. Issue with pathing the South-East and South-West ramps of the middle island have bugged pathing due fail usage of the ramp tool (blame blizzard) and archways. I would strongly recommend fixing this issue ASAP (press P in the editor to see pathing of the map (CTRL+D to hide doodads), is easy way to find issues like this one). Easiest way of fixing this issue is to place Invisible Platform and lower it underground (Lower Hold Down CTRL and press "Page Down").

8. The grass tiles next to the Dirt Cliff does not look the best but I don't think there is much you can do about it, exept using dirt or short grass when getting closer to the clif edges.


Pros:
1. Item drops seem to be nice.

2. You mixed two tileset which I always encourage people to do (well not always but mostly), additionally you mixed the two I mix up the most.

3. The magical runes around the map look refressing, however they seem to be a bit random, mostly runes are placed by some kind of pattern.

4. You used various lilypads (minor thing but it's still nice to see).

5. Tile usage is mostly good, however I pointed out few areas already.

6. Creeps fit nicely together (except you mixed Mur'guls and Murlocs once, I'd have changed the murloc to a murgul though).

7. As pointed out the terrain is balanced and creep camps and neutral buildings along with it. (However I am not sure if Lordaeron Summer mercenary camp is the best one to go with it but it's up to you).

And for every one, sorry for the awfully long post.
Check the inserted image to see the pathing error.

 

[Forsaken]

It's really cool! Good work!

 

[PKCrafty]

I must start off with saying; good job on the item drops. The item drops are as they should be, very balanced. I commend you on this, for I have played so many custom melee maps with imbalanced item drops. The item ranges for each creep are as they should be, once again well done.

This map seems professionally made for competitive gameplay. The pathing is nice and smooth - nice open areas and good choke points. And this of course includes the layout, well done, it seems as if this map was made by Blizzard®. The neutral buildings are well placed with good pathing and surroundings around the neutral buildings. Not only that but you left the tavern unguarded (it should seem pointless to point this out, but I've seen a lot of maps make the mistake of guarding the tavern.) and this map has a goblin merchant. Both these buildings are a must in competitive maps.

The map is well balanced for each and every race, something I don't see often.


Maybe increase starting goldmines up to 12500 instead of all being 10000; since the map is so small and there is the option for 3 people to be playing at once.
Also I noticed the creep camps sight/range are at 500 instead of the standard 200 for the expansions. The main reason why it is set to 200 is for proxy building; such as AoW(Ancient of War) creeping as nightelf, putting up proxy voodoo lounge as orc. (for a stronger harass/pressure) Or human making scout farms to detect opponent movement across the map. I saw you set the range for all the other camps to 200, so I'm at a lost as why the expansions are 500. I'm interested in knowing your thoughts behind this.

Now the terrain is up to par with blizzard standards, along with creeps, amount of expansions, item drops, pathing, layout, and overall balancing. In my book that's a 5/5 rating based on that.
The terrain has excellent tile variation with well placed doodads giving the map a well and strong swamp/glade lively atmosphere. The map is very pretty and beautiful islands on the outside of the map. Although this is not really important in competitive maps, but still, it is a very nice touch nonetheless.


"Look at dat, a "non symmentrical" 3 player map. Hard to copy n paste, since you can't rotate 120 degress in the editor." Well I beg to differ. This is as symmetrical as you could possibly get in a 3-player map. Well done.

Did not find any bugs or flaws in the map.

Do not really have any suggestions except increasing the mainbase gold and decreasing creep camps sight/range (but if you left it at 500 on purpose with a reason, that's fine). Other than that the map is well-made. I mean, I could suggest other things, but they're more of a personal preference/style.

Overall the map is well balanced and could play at a high competitive skill level, such as myself. You sir deserve +rep with a rating of 5/5. Hope to see more maps from you, such at this high caliber of quality.

Contact me if you have any questions.

 

[UrijelV]

Fun map, reminds me of Tidewater Glades but I prefer this one. Like the numerous creep locations. Your creation was immidiately recognized when I saw a crab at the south middle green creep location.

 

[sonofjay]

How come that this is still not approved? This is probably one of Filmting's greatest work. Such a fine balance on the terrain symmetry for a 3 player map when most 3 way melee maps uses a straight triangle shape to balance the terrain.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

How come that this is still not approved? This is probably one of Filmting's greatest work. Such a fine balance on the terrain symmetry for a 3 player map when most 3 way melee maps uses a straight triangle shape to balance the terrain.

Indeed. Please see the moderator comment for the status of the map.

 

[Remixer]

I am not so sure that this is a 5/5 map after all. In my opinion it seem as if the reviewer/moderator neglected the terrain. Or is it just that I focus on it so much on my maps.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

I am not so sure that this is a 5/5 map after all. In my opinion it seem as if the reviewer/moderator neglected the terrain. Or is it just that I focus on it so much on my maps.

I did open it up, it is everything a melee map should be. Plus, PKcrafty, SonOfJay, Forsaken, UrijelV, seem to love this map. But inspite that it's what a melee map should be, I realized 5/5 is too generous for having 'good' (not spectacular) terrain but a perfect gameplay score.

Expect a change in the comment.Thank you for your input on my comment, I still have time to learn things. I cannot do it right now, I am on mobile.

 

[SweeTw3]

remixer your maps aren't melee maps, sorry bud

 

[Remixer]

remixer your maps aren't melee maps, sorry bud

This might get offtopic but what are they then?

@StoPCampinGn00b

Yeh well you brought up a good point, as far as I know the 5/5 rating is used when the map has something unique/spectacular to offer. So even if everything is done "well" or are "good" it's not 5/5 since 5/5 is something special.

On the other hand 6/5 rating is given when the product has something really unique and great in it which is mostly unforeseen, especially in Melee maps. Additionally I do not think that the maps that have gained 6/5 rating has any flaws to point out, they are result of work that has taken months or years.

And as we can check how many melee maps has gained the 6/5 rating we can pretty much admit that melee maps does not have that "special" or "unforeseen" to offer. Or maybe no one has found it yet.

 

[Orcnet]

Well, StoPCampinGn00b is on his trial initiation recently for becoming a moderator, let's give him some slack for the moment. Giving him the powers of over 9000(minus -1 lol) is quite a handful and surprising, the ratings yes are kind of high, but we all know what is a good map and something-something.

I'll be re-checking on it once I can solve most of the other pending that is shamefully on hold for a long time.

 

[PKCrafty]

This might get offtopic but what are they then?

@StoPCampinGn00b

Yeh well you brought up a good point, as far as I know the 5/5 rating is used when the map has something unique/spectacular to offer. So even if everything is done "well" or are "good" it's not 5/5 since 5/5 is something special.

On the other hand 6/5 rating is given when the product has something really unique and great in it which is mostly unforeseen, especially in Melee maps. Additionally I do not think that the maps that have gained 6/5 rating has any flaws to point out, they are result of work that has taken months or years.

And as we can check how many melee maps has gained the 6/5 rating we can pretty much admit that melee maps does not have that "special" or "unforeseen" to offer. Or maybe no one has found it yet.

I see your point, so I'll go ahead and explain my reasoning for a 5/5 rating.

This map is a standard melee map, so I will strongly be reviewing this map on gameplay, layout, overall balance, and terrain - but not so much. (doesn't mean it can look bland, or anything like that, just as long as it is appealing to the eye, and is appropriate for the theme.

Map is original - to an extent.
Map is very symmetrical for a 3P map. - check
Map follows standard rules of competitive melee maps, such as item drops, neutral building placement, starting locations, creep patterns, and so on.
Map terrain is up to par with blizzard standards - check

I compare all standard melee maps to blizzard melee maps. This way I have a baseline of how a competitive melee map functions, and works to have a well-balanced map.

So this map meets all of the requirements for a working balanced melee map, therefore I gave it a 5/5 rating. Now 6/5 ratings on melee maps... its not really possible for a standard melee map. It'd have to be a costumed terrain melee map that doesn't ignore balance/gameplay of a melee map. It goes without saying, for a map to achieve 6/5 rating the map would have to be special, something unique and 100% original. Something that would define it differently as something like a whole new genera. And this is for any type of map, not just melee maps.

Now for melee maps that use custom terrain, I do not really consider them a standard melee map, because they have custom features, such as the terrain. And normally people that use custom terrain/models in melee maps, ignore the gameplay, and most importantly they ignore balance. (I'm not saying everyone does)

P.S. Ratings are suppose to be objective, but they really aren't. People tend to rate maps based on their perspective. Just like me, my perspective of a melee map differs from you. You may think my rating is too high, I may think yours is too low. That's fine and all, people just have to understand that principle. Not everyone views something the same, it's not possible. You can't force someone too either, but you can make them understand your point of view.

 

[Remixer]

I compare all standard melee maps to blizzard melee maps. This way I have a baseline of how a competitive melee map functions, and works to have a well-balanced map.

Now for melee maps that use custom terrain, I do not really consider them a standard melee map, because they have custom features, such as the terrain. And normally people that use custom terrain/models in melee maps, ignore the gameplay, and most importantly they ignore balance. (I'm not saying everyone does)

Off Topic
Hmm in my opinion there is no sense comparing melee maps to Blizzards melee maps because I think blizzard is one of lousy terrainer.

For example things you can find in Blizzard maps:
very odd height variations, floating doodads (e.g. rocks & bridges), even more odd tile variation usage and the emptiness of many of their maps is just awful.

In my scale I'd rate most of Blizzard melee map terrains 2/5 or 3/5.

Because I think it's more than fair to reward the players whom actually put effort on making better terrain than Blizzard did. I think it's unfair to give 5/5 rating to a map with blizzard terrain and to map with very detailed terrain (and there is those here on hive in melee section), if both of the maps get same rating from everything else.

I think you should not rate terrain 5/5 if it meets Blizzard's level. When I play Blizzard melee maps my eyes often start bleeding, just for seeing the awful usage doodads and tiles and leaving large empty areas.

For example SonOfJay's map In the End has very modified terrain and he did that to get 6/5 rating, yet he did not. I think we can pretty much all agree in here that In the Ends terrain is way better than Blizzards, yet it did not give it extra notification, just 5/5 rating, in the scale this map is equal to In the End.


As a moderator you should bring out things that can be improved, for example In the End has sharp & edgy diagonal ramps and the South and East borders of the map look pretty... strange I would have pointed that out and suggest SonOfJay to fix it.

Just because this is already getting off topic I'm gonna end this already long post.

On Topic

So I decided to take clearer look at this (Glade) maps terrain so I'd like to point I noticed on a quick check across the map.

Cons:
1. Floating doodads (rocks, sunken ruins rubble (small) all around the middle island (next/on the cliff). You should either raise the doodads or remove/rescale them so that they dong hang off the edge.

2. The shallow water area is very flat, try to get some height variation in there raise and lower the ground, but keep the type shallow water.

3. The tile usage in the shallow water area could use more dirt and rough dirt and less grass, since grass rarely grows underwater.

4. A bit minor detail but it's still sticking in my eye, there is a lamp (totem lantern) behind the trees at the North-East part of the center island, I think it's "a terraining typo" since it looks really out of place there.

5. The doodads are very stacked all across the map, what I mean that there is a lot of them but most of them are in a bunches of e.g. 10 rocks and lots of shrubs and mushrooms and on the way to the next pile there is no doodads. This style should be avoided since having smoothly decorated terrain is mostly a better way since having the piled style often leaves the rest of the terrain really empty looking (like in this case) ( I am still having this issue myself a little, but I'm working on fixing it ).

6. I am not sure about this one since a lot of people do it, but in my eyes the waterfalls starting from the side of the cliff (or above them) looks really strange, I think the best way to fix this would be to remove the waterfalls since there is rarely water falls in the sea anyway.

7. Issue with pathing the South-East and South-West ramps of the middle island have bugged pathing due fail usage of the ramp tool (blame blizzard) and archways. I would strongly recommend fixing this issue ASAP (press P in the editor to see pathing of the map (CTRL+D to hide doodads), is easy way to find issues like this one). Easiest way of fixing this issue is to place Invisible Platform and lower it underground (Lower Hold Down CTRL and press "Page Down").

8. The grass tiles next to the Dirt Cliff does not look the best but I don't think there is much you can do about it, exept using dirt or short grass when getting closer to the clif edges.


Pros:
1. Item drops seem to be nice.

2. You mixed two tileset which I always encourage people to do (well not always but mostly), additionally you mixed the two I mix up the most.

3. The magical runes around the map look refressing, however they seem to be a bit random, mostly runes are placed by some kind of pattern.

4. You used various lilypads (minor thing but it's still nice to see).

5. Tile usage is mostly good, however I pointed out few areas already.

6. Creeps fit nicely together (except you mixed Mur'guls and Murlocs once, I'd have changed the murloc to a murgul though).

7. As pointed out the terrain is balanced and creep camps and neutral buildings along with it. (However I am not sure if Lordaeron Summer mercenary camp is the best one to go with it but it's up to you).

And for every one, sorry for the awfully long post.
Check the inserted image to see the pathing error.

@PKCrafty and something "stopcampingnoob"
You propably missed some things I pointed out but I hope you will learn in the course of time... (awesome G-Man quote)

 

[PKCrafty]

I think you should not rate terrain 5/5 if it meets Blizzard's level. When I play Blizzard melee maps my eyes often start bleeding, just for seeing the awful usage doodads and tiles and leaving large empty areas.

For example SonOfJay's map In the End has very modified terrain and he did that to get 6/5 rating, yet he did not. I think we can pretty much all agree in here that In the Ends terrain is way better than Blizzards, yet it did not give it extra notification, just 5/5 rating, in the scale this map is equal to In the End.


As a moderator you should bring out things that can be improved, for example In the End has sharp & edgy diagonal ramps and the South and East borders of the map look pretty... strange I would have pointed that out and suggest SonOfJay to fix it.

Just because this is already getting off topic I'm gonna end this already long post.

As I said, I do not rate melee maps based on only terrain. Which you are fighting so strongly for. Melee maps are not made for looks, they are made for gameplay, terrain is a very little part of it. I will not play a map if the gameplay is horrendous, the looks don't make up for bad gameplay . But sadly this is all that matters to people, is looks. People only play games with life-like graphics, even if the game mechanics were made by a 5 year old. People no longer care for gameplay anymore. Don't get me wrong, I do not ignore terrain all together, as I said about this map:

The terrain has excellent tile variation with well placed doodads giving the map a well and strong swamp/glade lively atmosphere. The map is very pretty and beautiful islands on the outside of the map. Although this is not really important in competitive maps, but still, it is a very nice touch nonetheless.

You can't say I ignored the terrain as you put it. I gave my perspective of the terrain, and I did not find any flaws in the terrain. That doesn't mean there aren't any. But nitpicking terrain for a standard melee map is not necessary. Unless you are looking to improve minor flaws to make the map perfect, but who's to say a map is deemed worthy of perfection.

And like I said, you can NOT compare this map with sonofjays like you are doing, because they are not even in the same category. This map has NO custom doodads/terrain or anything related to it. He made the best with what he had as default material, not imported terrain like sonofjays custom fine work he made. Comparing the two works is biased, its like comparing a RPG game with FPS, and the FPS game has to follow RPG rules.

P.S. You misunderstood my comparison between player made melee maps and blizzard melee maps. I stated comparing the two for a baseline of how a competitive melee map functions, and works to have a well-balanced map. I was not comparing the two between terrain, as you seem to think.

 

[Remixer]

Offtopic

How can you say you can't compare them? They are both melees and you are free to use custom resources, it's mostly recommended. Check my post above and see the flaws I found.

I did not mean you neglect terrain but you can't say I neglect everything else, it's just often the terrain it comes up to as most of good melee map makers here do know how to make a balanced map and put correct creep camp item drops, there is not much left to judge but terrain and uniqueness.

And about the P.S.
Maybe so but I still do not think you can give "5/5" rating just because it follows guidelines of Blizzard melee map, not all of them are balances or deserve even 4/5 rating.

with well placed doodads

How can you say doodads are well placed when they partly block very important paths (ramps) and you can see rocks floating in the mid air, surely Blizzard does this too but in my eyes it does not make it justified if blizzard does it too. There is prettier ways of doing things than what Blizzard did, for example lowering the rocks so that they do not float in the thin air.

After note:
In my opinion the higher rating you give map the most attention you must give to the map compare it to the maps that previously has gained same rating and value things equally to previous judging.
Also as a judge/moderator you should always bring up points that can be improved, maybe you do not value terrain so you can rate this map 5/5 but I can tell you this terrain can be improved and I think the Author knows it aswell.
When I upload maps I really hope people to point out things they do not like and I try to improve in these areas so the next map is better.

Around seventh edit to this post: I do not mean to offend you or say you are bad moderator but it's always good to discuss about things and see other perspective on things.

 

[PKCrafty]

I see your point. For me, terrain makes up 1/5 of the rating for standard melee maps.
And you're right, blizzard terrain isn't very appealing after you made me think about it. So this map 'The Glades' IMO as of right now has better terrain than blizzard. He had a better use of variation and patterns, along with the doodads. So when I was rating this map I gave it a 5/5. But it was a 4.7, I just rounded it to a 5.

You may rate melee maps based solely on terrain as a 3/5. Which is completely fine, it is good to have stronger points of each aspect that makes up a melee map. Mine being balance and gameplay.

I am open minded on all subjects, I will consider terrain strongly now in my future reviews since you made such a compelling argument; as we both did. But yes, I understand you, I do see that this map could be a 4/5 rating. Just because he used default terrain/doodads. But it seems unfair for someone who put a lot of work into making a map appealing and balanced, and be downgraded for not using custom features/models. That is why I gave it a 5/5 rating.

P.S. I would not consider anything that you and I have posted off-topic, I think it is good to discuss why we gave the map our specific rating of choice. Hopefully spectators can learn from both of our perspectives so they can make better reviews, and/or maps.

 

[Remixer]

Yeah well in my reviews I assume that balance is just a "must" if the map is not balanced enough it can't be accepted. However I do not think the 2 ramps being blocked more than the one in the north is balanced.

Pretty much every melee map I've reviewed have been balanced (but not always) and I do mention if it is not balanced and I point out specifically which things are not balanced.

However I think gameplay is the final result of terrain, balance and uniqueness.

But it seems unfair for someone who put a lot of work into making a map appealing and balanced

People use different times on making maps look "appealing" some times people make maps (even me) for really long time to make them look cool and eventually they do not really work out or do not look so good. In this case I don't know how much time has been spent on terraining but it could be a lot better.

And I take balance for granted, maybe I should not.

Also I've been picky about using custom resources and not using them but I was told it's pretty much the point of this whole community and you should not raise the rating just because some one did not use the custom resources.

 

[PKCrafty]

Also I've been picky about using custom resources and not using them but I was told it's pretty much the point of this whole community and you should not raise the rating just because some one did not use the custom resources.

Yes, but should they be punished for not using them?


P.S. I looked into the unbalanced ramp that you mentioned, it's not really imbalanced. It's so minor I didn't even noticed, still can't really. This does not affect gameplay in a major way, or in a minor way either. A map can be symmetric, but only to a certain point, criticizing at this level though isn't necessary as it does no harm. It may look better, but that's if you could even notice the difference, which I doubt I would be able to.

 

[Remixer]

Yes, but should they be punished for not using them?

No, but you need to know that you can make amazing creations with only Blizzard resources (for example check my map "Ancient Temples" or "Depths Temples". There is no custom resources used and they do look pretty fancy.

Also, if you are not willing to use custom resources (like I am often not) I am ready to accept the fact that I do not get same rating than the ones who do use them.

However one very interesting point in here is, that I think on melee map making there is very, very little usable resources here on hive. Most good models/skins take awfully lots of space and many models does not fit very well unless the whole environment is changed.

Do not take for granted that custom resources makes something look better, it actually does not. It just changes the outlook and ways to do things.

 

[Filmting]

Also I've been picky about using custom resources and not using them but I was told it's pretty much the point of this whole community and you should not raise the rating just because some one did not use the custom resources.

Or raise it just because they did. You rate the map based on what it is, and in my deffiniton i would say that any change, no matter how minor, that makes the map appear as non melee in the blizzard definition should classify the map as an alterneed melee. After that you should take a look at what is alterneed and does it improve the map in anyway. This also goes for a normal mapish.

It all depends on what style the creator is going for also. Speaking of style, while i am thankfull for the 5/5 this map have gotten, imo it deserves 4/5 for multiple reasons both asthetically and balance wise, the terrain can have some improvements, but it's important to keep in mind that each map maker have his own style, and there is no such thing as a wrong way of doing it. Some map makers might want to go for a more minmilastic style, or a blizzardlike style, while others maybe wanna go more overboard or excessive and if so does the map live up to that style. This is why terrain review could also be a bit controversial, as often creators try to force their own style upon others. I myself go for an blizzard like style with using no customs of any description, but still will use an excessive amounts of doodads along with the shift key to stack doodads even more. I don't mind big open areas and personally thing a minimalistic tile variation is better then a mixtured clusterfuck of tiles that makes little sense.

As a reviewer imo, trying to understand what style the creator is going for, and keeping your own personal opinions out of it, but seeing if the creator of that map acomplishes to fufill that style perfectly. An example of this would be AYF's http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/twisted-grove-256893/ that i would say perfectly mimics blizzards style and i would the terrain high raitings for what it is, not what it could be or is not.

I apreciate discussion on this topic though, so keep up the good non angry construtive discussions.

Edit: Also there is always room for improvements in any map, always, i personally though tend to just move on to the next and use my experiences to make a better next time instead of updating the same map too much.

 

[Remixer]

Hidden

Or raise it just because they did. You rate the map based on what it is, and in my deffiniton i would say that any change, no matter how minor, that makes the map appear as non melee in the blizzard definition should classify the map as an alterneed melee. After that you should take a look at what is alterneed and does it improve the map in anyway. This also goes for a normal mapish.

It all depends on what style the creator is going for also. Speaking of style, while i am thankfull for the 5/5 this map have gotten, imo it deserves 4/5 for multiple reasons both asthetically and balance wise, the terrain can have some improvements, but it's important to keep in mind that each map maker have his own style, and there is no such thing as a wrong way of doing it. Some map makers might want to go for a more minmilastic style, or a blizzardlike style, while others maybe wanna go more overboard or excessive and if so does the map live up to that style. This is why terrain review could also be a bit controversial, as often creators try to force their own style upon others. I myself go for an blizzard like style with using no customs of any description, but still will use an excessive amounts of doodads along with the shift key to stack doodads even more. I don't mind big open areas and personally thing a minimalistic tile variation is better then a mixtured clusterfuck of tiles that makes little sense.

As a reviewer imo, trying to understand what style the creator is going for, and keeping your own personal opinions out of it, but seeing if the creator of that map acomplishes to fufill that style perfectly. An example of this would be AYF's http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/maps-564/twisted-grove-256893/ that i would say perfectly mimics blizzards style and i would the terrain high raitings for what it is, not what it could be or is not.

I apreciate discussion on this topic though, so keep up the good non angry construtive discussions.

Edit: Also there is always room for improvements in any map, always, i personally though tend to just move on to the next and use my experiences to make a better next time instead of updating the same map too much.

I totally agree with the style point and on the Twisted Grove, it indeed mimics Blizzard style very well.

However this map does not mimic Blizzard style as well and in my opinion (and in majoritys opinion) floating rocks are not good idea. The bunchy placement is another thing that majority (I think) thinks is not good or as smooth looking. I have mentioned before that there is some places where the "bunch-style" is good but not on this thread though.

Indeed it's up to the author whether he uses things others do or how he wants his terrain to be done, however as we all know people have their own opinions and it's good they bring them up. I've changed my opinion on many things here on hive, just because I noticed them after some one actually said like:
"Hey the emptiness looks odd compared to the overgrown nature next to it"
"You might want to change this building into something else, since it's unnecessary to have two of these."
or something like it.

However even on the Twisted Grove, I commented on it and I think she/he did change the shallow water areas tile using after I pointed out that it look odd having so much grass underwater.

There truly is different styles of terraining; Filmting style, Remixer style, SonOfJay style... and so on, if we want to put labels on them.

My style is pretty much trying to make as high detailed terrain with as low amount of custom resources as possible and making innovative and creative solutions to even the minor things. I try to make terrain smooth looking, not having pileful of rocks at some place (imo it looks ugly).

Sorry if I am wrong SonOfJay
SonOfJay often uses a lot of custom resources and definies his style with them, making it very different to any one elses style, maybe this is one thing he wants to bring up with using custom resources. With my experience I can say he also likes breaking "normal melee" borders by making very huge height variations in his maps or making cliffs with raise tool rather than using Blizzard cliff.

Like we noticed we have different opinions:
Filmting said he does hold down shift while placing doodads and is willing to do so.

Opposite is most likely me who actually tells people not to stack doodads and myself I place if not every single doodad 99% of them one by one and I select their placement very specifically (my camera is zoomed very close to the ground (check the picture) when I am placing small doodads like shrub). And I place each doodad individually, for example I place shrubs near rocks, but not on them so that it does not look like the shrub is growing out of the rock, additionally I raise/lower and scale & rotate each rock individually. I might be one the pickies melee map terrainers, but I like to do things specifically.

In the picture you can see pretty much basic distance of my camera when I am placing shrubs. ( I also rotate it around the rock to place shrubs around it as well, not only front.
Not many people do it but you still can rotate camera ingame with Delete and Insert keys.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

No need to apologize Remixer, I should have waited 'till today to moderate this one. My mistake for being over zealous trying to squeeze one more moderation in before I slept. Map approved with a 4/5 rating.

 

[sonofjay]

Underrated and unappreciated melee map maybe it is still the most ridiculously hard genre to review and that is because of many little factors that most people don't see/appreciate so the best thing when you receive any kind of review is ignore all the bad stuffs that you is just plain wrong and just take all the little things that you think might help improve your map.

 

[Remixer]

Underrated and unappreciated melee map maybe it is still the most ridiculously hard genre to review and that is because of many little factors that most people don't see/appreciate so the best thing when you receive any kind of review is ignore all the bad stuffs that you is just plain wrong and just take all the little things that you think might help improve your map.

I am not sure if it's the hardest genre to review since I have not reviewed any other.

I actually got interested in that "many little factors that most people don't see/appreciate" sentence. What did you mean by that?

Indeed, a review is made by a person and each person has personal opinions and styles so it's not absolute truth. Take what you can and leave what can't carry with you. And use the things you want.

 

[sonofjay]

I am not sure if it's the hardest genre to review since I have not reviewed any other.

I played and reviewed many kinds of maps before and most of them already have a solid foundations and guidelines.

I actually got interested in that "many little factors that most people don't see/appreciate" sentence. What did you mean by that?

They're all just simple stuffs and nothing really special. Position and level of creep camps, flexibility of item drops, tactical placement of cliffs, trees and some other pathing blocking doodads and many other stuffs that should be obvious for any melee mapper. Sounds so be basic for us since we all make melee maps but some reviewers who doesn't really make and play melee maps will often overlooks those things because, well, they're just simple stuffs but this little things is what really makes a melee map solid.

 

[SweeTw3]

Ok, first things first. The Hive really needs 2 separate Melee Map categories - 1 for terrain based maps were the creators value weird eccentric styles and terrain above anything else including gameplay. The other should be for Proper Melee Maps. And what I mean by that is maps that comply to Blizzard's map standards. I'll be honest The Glade is probably a 4.1/5 - Filmting has better maps than this I feel. Anyway, right now I feel Filmting is the only person who makes Proper Melee Map's these days, sure you guys also make melee maps, but I feel maps that you make are purely based on terrain. It appears like you guys have no clue on how melee games work, which is a shame because there is a good number of players that still play high level melee games and run leagues, which are always on the lookout for new Melee maps. For example Remixer, your map 'Ancient Temple' was used in playffa.net mappool as an FFA map for a few months. I played on it personally, and to me it was unplayable, there was no consideration for gameplay at all (the paths were way too small - no room to fight). HOWEVER I do agree that maps worthy of 5/5 should strike a balance between great gameplay and unique and fresh terrain with brilliant execution and ideas. For me not even the best Blizzard maps have reached a 5/5 - but some are close. I think you should take a look at r.gaming strikes melee maps on the hive, they are very good and I personally think some of them are worthy of a 5/5. Don't take this personally Remixer, because I really do think you can achieve a 5/5 map with your unique terrain, doodads etc. but I think you should read some guides (filmting's for example) and mimic blizzard maps to get an idea of balance and gameplay, because based on your maps, it seems you have never played a melee game in your life.

 

[Remixer]

Ok, first things first. The Hive really needs 2 separate Melee Map categories - 1 for terrain based maps were the creators value weird eccentric styles and terrain above anything else including gameplay. The other should be for Proper Melee Maps. And what I mean by that is maps that comply to Blizzard's map standards. I'll be honest The Glade is probably a 4.1/5 - Filmting has better maps than this I feel. Anyway, right now I feel Filmting is the only person who makes Proper Melee Map's these days, sure you guys also make melee maps, but I feel maps that you make are purely based on terrain. It appears like you guys have no clue on how melee games work, which is a shame because there is a good number of players that still play high level melee games and run leagues, which are always on the lookout for new Melee maps. For example Remixer, your map 'Ancient Temple' was used in playffa.net mappool as an FFA map for a few months. I played on it personally, and to me it was unplayable, there was no consideration for gameplay at all (the paths were way too small - no room to fight). HOWEVER I do agree that maps worthy of 5/5 should strike a balance between great gameplay and unique and fresh terrain with brilliant execution and ideas. For me not even the best Blizzard maps have reached a 5/5 - but some are close. I think you should take a look at r.gaming strikes melee maps on the hive, they are very good and I personally think some of them are worthy of a 5/5. Don't take this personally Remixer, because I really do think you can achieve a 5/5 map with your unique terrain, doodads etc. but I think you should read some guides (filmting's for example) and mimic blizzard maps to get an idea of balance and gameplay, because based on your maps, it seems you have never played a melee game in your life.

Thanks for bringing that point out. Actually I personally agree and know that Ancient Temples and Depths Temples are one of my worst maps when it comes to gameplay, since the pathways indeed are way too small. I got told about it when they got uploaded and you can see that I did not make same mistake anymore. I improved on that section, even thought it looked fancy I learned it does not work. (Check Ancient Warfield, Ancient Hymns or Ancient Falls). Indeed the two first maps I mentioned suck in gameplay.

The point of mentioning those two maps were to bring up the fact that you can make spectacular things with only Blizzard resources. And not using custom resources is not a reason to make worse terrain. The most important reason for me sticking to Blizzard resources was to actually show people that you can indeed make things out of them.

However I do think that even when I put effort on the terrain some of my maps still offer a great melee game experiences, including good gameplay and strategic points to play with.

However I will take look at Filmtings tutorial as suggested.

Editing:

After reading throughout Filmtings great guide on how to balance competitive melee map and reading one of his review/comment I've got to some pretty odd conclusion. We are not really talking about same melee maps. I think hive workshop should in some way separate 1) Competitive Melee maps and 2) Melee maps.

These two things differ from each other majorly. Competitive melee maps mustn't contain any custom created units/items or custom made "raise cliffs" and should pretty strictly follow the basic lines on creeping, their levels and racial balance. However the normal melee maps can and is even encouraged to excel in to this area, having custom shops and items, cool creeps and good looking terrain, even when it's not the most practical for a competitive play. I think most of us can agree with the fact that not every player plays competitive melee (I don't) and it indeed shows up when comparing "normal" melee map to a competitive one and I think it's more than important to draw a line between these two, here in THW.

I would strongly suggest to take this thing up to the moderation and bring up the issues this problem (Having only "melee map") can cause, from having a fountain of health with land units, to not having trees near any creep camps, all the way to having too many/little critters on the map. These things may not effect normal melee gameplay that much but they are a major point in competitive play.


I think that this difference competitive or not clears our discussion/debate very well.
Competitive melee maps must have clear terrain that stands out for the smooth gameplay and strategical purposes, however, still it shall not be neglected. Having high pumps or trees in your map or having many effects on the map can get really problematic.

Non-Competitive melee maps however sometimes desire to have custom things, like imports, resources, units and doodads to spice up the "boring" gameplay. These are two way different worlds, which are both called just "melee", maybe this has to be fixed.

 

[PKCrafty]

That's what I've been saying. You finally see it now thanks to sweet fully explaining it.

 

[sonofjay]

We can actually bring this to hive staffs but seeing that the request of some BossFight map makers was rejected(they want to have a different genre instead of sticking to "Offense") the chance of that being considered is pretty quite low.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

BossFight map makers was rejected

What is this and what does it have to do with this map? You mean survival games? Or are you referring to dungeon crawl RPGs like sunken city? Sorry, I'm confused.


Offense = Castle Fight, Missile War, Tech Wars, Bomber Command, Age of War etc.

 

[sonofjay]

@SCB

You're not getting the whole point of my post so you should read it again.

EDIT:

Maybe I should just say that Hive staff(at that time) is not considering adding new genre can't see a reason why they will this time.

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Okay, I've read the past few comments carefully again. If I am not mistaken (again), you believe it's a good idea to split the melee map section by adding a competitive melee map section and a 'melee' map section. Now would this mean high rated melee maps that follow filmting's guide but that also have many custom models be considered as competitive melee? This concerns me a bit because it would be difficult sorting them out due to how easily they can overlap. Look at how we have Hero Arena and Arena. All of those maps are the same, if you shuffled them around you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

In my opinion, it's not a completely bad idea. But I do feel like users can easily navigate through which maps look like competitive and which look uncompetitive by checking comments.


PS. It's SCN.

 

[sonofjay]

That is why I'm saying that it might not be considered since its not like the difference is too great to warrant a new genre. At the end of the day its still just a melee map.

PS. It's SCN.

Ooops, my bad.

 

[SweeTw3]

Yes, I agree with " if you shuffled them around you wouldn't be able to tell the difference." but thats not the reason I originally wanted the two different categories. It was mainly because they;re rated and reviewed completely differently. Creators like sonofjay and remixer, understandably, don't see why maps like this are rated so high. Well, its because tbh they're two completely different categories. They may look similar on the surface, but once you open the map up, there is a clear distinction between the two. One is for looking nice, one is for gameplay - to put it simply. And I don't think custom models should be excluded from 'Competitive Melee Maps' at all, infact it would probably bringing something fresh and new to the maps, they just need to follow a Blizzard-like standard in terms of balance, creeping etc, whereas maps that are made for terrain don't really need to have any guideline - you can basically get as creative as you want. I think the confusion comes from people who have never seen or played a melee game before - the simply don't understand the mechanics of the game and the reason behind Filmting's decisions.

 

[sonofjay]

Creators like sonofjay and remixer, understandably, don't see why maps like this are rated so high.

Funny since I just posted this on Filmting's other map a few days ago.

I'm not gonna write a full review about this since I'm also a contestant of the contest but I still think this deserve more than just 2.5 that SF gave.

I already acknowledged Filmting's style of melee mapping for quite a while now.

 

[Remixer]

@ StoPCampinGn00b
My comment wasn't really a review so I kinda don't know why you put it to the moderators comment but it's okay.

But back to the discussion on Competitive/Non-Competitive Melee maps. I think that these two might be reviewed differently, as in Competitive Melee map the gameplay, creep placement, critter placement and neutral buildings and their placement gets more attention along with balance. As for Non-Competitive Melee map (g.e. my maps: Gaias, Swampling's Lullaby, Elder Lands) do not focus at these things, instead of bringing something new to a melee, like super strong creep or ultimate items... something that would not be considered okay in Competitive melee map. Here the difference comes:
Competitive Melee Map can't really get score in "uniqueness" or "creativity" as it really fast changes the gameplay mechanics or balance of the map. Introducing new custom creeps makes it no longer Competitive map.
Non-Competitive Melee Map on the other hand gets a mentionable amount of its score from these factors, good looking terrain, custom (triggered) creeps, new items, new neutral buildings, custom teleports... something that really spices up the game and introduced something new.

If we mix these two we need clear rating format like
Terrain ( Outlook, Doodads ) 30 Points
Neutral ( Buildings, Critters ) 15 Points
Creeps ( Creeps, Item Drops ) 25 Points
Uniqueness ( New Ideas, Execution ) 15 Points
Gameplay ( How well the map performs in use ) 30 Points

Out of maximum 30 + 15 + 25 + 15 + 30 = 115 Points, out of which 5/5 rating could reach around 100 Points.

 

[SweeTw3]

I disagree with this post remixer, almost entirely.

Competitive Melee Maps need to have a uniqueness and creativity score! I love seeing creative and unique melee maps along as they're fit for competitive melee playing, and not just random custom models and weird creeps/items thrown around the place. Also custom models/creeps shouldn't really be discriminated from Competitive Melee Maps IMO. thats not the point. It doesn't matter how many custom models a competitive map uses, as long as its balanced.