Influences on Map Favorites

General Discussion
Post Limit:
Prev 1 4 5 6 9 Next
For me I like having a variety. I think one map in each season should look like Alterzim with the pocket natural, but no more than that. A balance of two player and four player, with some small and some big. I know that is not really specific, but it is my preference. I also like maps that lend themselves to macro games, since I tend to suck at cheesey and all in play.
What has the biggest influence on determining how much you like a map?
Poll ended on Aug 18, 2014
Wow very smart blizzard interacting with the community for maps great thinking guys!
Definitely "offers standard gameplay" and "nice map art style" (pleasant to the eye is really important to me). Gimmicks, variety and experimentation can be interesting but should not interfere with the meta too much. I may add that I hate 4 players map and have a heavy preference towards 2 players maps (or forced spawns maps).
current WOL maps are the best 1v1 maps ever made.
I just hate playing maps that feel like they are specifically catered to one race, or constructed in a such a way that my race is completely gimped. I don't ask for much. A clear and reasonable third and fourth, a short creep distance from main to nat (biggest gripe about new map, spreading creep to the nat is terrible 90% of the time), and a few places to spot with overlord. Making it a least a little hard for Protoss to proxy Pylons and tech is an added bonus.
08/14/2014 12:24 PMPosted by MrJazzHands
I've always been into art style myself
08/14/2014 12:25 PMPosted by SliTaz
I wish there was less focus on 4p maps. Blind buildorder wins are pretty boring.

'
i agree, but i also don't enjoy easy proxy strategies on 2 player maps, i really like the 3 player maps.
Standard gameplay and produces enjoyable games are the two most important imo. Art is cool, but any map can be redone with cool art. Offering unique gameplay is sometimes cool (see: Habitation Station), but often it gets old very quickly and just leads to the prevalence of a single strategy.
Offering unique features and gameplay, within reason. It should still be plenty possible to play standard on a map, but a map that also encourages players to improvise and experiment causes new strategies and tactics to surface that can be used in place of or to enhance the standard meta strategies and tactics. And sometimes, such strategies and tactics are borrowed for the other maps.

In general, this makes maps both fun to play and fun to watch, in my opinion. I'll usually pick a more original map to play than one that's like most of the others. Even if the map is gotten rid of later on for some reason (like standard being difficult to do on it, which is rarely the case), if it brings even a single something out that players add to their strategies or tactics on other maps as well, the game typically improves as a whole, or, if it's detrimental to the game, it can be shown and changed.
I picked the "produces enjoyable games to watch option" but really I more mean produces enjoyable games to play.

Unique features and gameplay are a part of that, but I feel like something close to standard should be playable on everymap. I don't think we need to mix in Steppes of War or Debris Field into ladder just to have "unique gameplay".
I really like innovative gameplay. I feel like everytime I watch a match, I know what's going to happen. (i.e. Terran opens reaper expand, then into hellions. Zerg does this to counter it, etc). Since starcraft has this, the terms "meta" and "standard play" come into usage. I believe it will be nearly impossible to change the game enough so that those terms go away, but I would really like to see strategies that are relatively unused become used again. This is why I clicked "offers unique features or gameplay". This carries over into more exciting games to watch as well.

Although the map "sucked", Korhal Sky Island's weird spawns were fun for me. I enjoyed going zerg drops on that map and will forever remember a game where my terran opponent and I had a "drop off" where we just dropped eachother all game. Well, as a zerg I hadn't had much experience with drops really, so he eventually won, but it was a REALLY FUN GAME! I wish more games could be that way. I don't want to know what's going to happen everygame, and wish more strategic variety of the game was brought back.

I'm very glad that after I voted, the results seemed to show that others agreed with me. The game has gotten predictable, and people would like to see more new strategies!
08/14/2014 12:25 PMPosted by SliTaz
I wish there was less focus on 4p maps. Blind buildorder wins are pretty boring.

'
i agree, but i also don't enjoy easy proxy strategies on 2 player maps, i really like the 3 player maps.
I'm torn between unique game play and enjoyable to watch. I'd love to do weird stuff on maps, but I'd love to see pros show great and fun games.
To me it's, about entertainment. Maps are actually getting too large, they need to get a little smaller and a little more unique. Every map playing out exactly the same is bad, and something we need to avoid.
Unique features! My favorite are fun tank spots!
Essentially, there are a few features that make a map appealing to me. After all, don’t we all want to win? A map that favors one race over the other is definitely a negative to me. A level playing ground allows the gamers to use their abilities without having to struggle just to maintain economic balance. I will list a few of my priorities:

• Protected expansion! I like to get my second going without a great deal of hassle. My opponent has the same opportunity, but that’s OK – It’s my job to out play him on even ground.
• I don’t want the third to be difficult. If it is, then the balance shifts to the race that can exploit that feature to their favor (not naming the obvious race).
• Even though I play mostly Protoss, I enjoy a moderately open terrain, with a moderate supply of ramps. I think this is a fair situation for all races. A closed terrain with small ramps favors Toss, and I don’t want that unfair advantage. An open terrain with large ramps favors Zerg and Terran. Let’s keep it balanced.
• I enjoy having a gold mineral base available for expansion. I don’t want it to be ridiculously easy – but I do want it to be doable. In extreme circumstances it’s nice to be able to take an opponent’s gold. If the available third had a rich geyser, I may be willing to quit drinking.
• Some maps limit the available space behind the main and 2nd. I think it is important that enough space be provided for air retreat to a safe area against ground troops. Most maps allow this, but some don’t. It’s definitely a negative for me. Exploiting the drop to the main or natural without having to expose your path (unless properly scouted), is the very essence of the game.
• The main thing is – let all players be able to develop a good economy without favoring one race over the other. Let each players skill determine the outcome of the match, certainly not map limitations.

Bottom line – the map should be without undue favor to ANY race. Let the best player win!!
After I played the Korhal Sky Island (it has two entrance)(http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/10145837)

I realized that the map offers unique features or gameplay makes me sick

And no one going to play that map

IF YOU REALLY LIKE UNIQUE FEATURES, ASK BLIZZARD TO REVERT THE DEADWING SPAWN
For me its mostly the opportunities the map provides. If the map supports macro play (thirds being close to the main base, or an easy natural to take) but doesn't exclude cheese builds.
Important for me:

- Map not too big. 4-Player-Map ist usualy disliked.
- Open expo (e.g. in King-Sejong) = bad

I think for the casual player a more standard map is better. Also a 2-Player map ist better because the casual player is no multitasking-monster
Hey there,
First of all I want to say that I love the fact that such a vote takes place in the first. I really feel like you are working on involving the community more and more and I like it.
Now to the vote: It was a hard choice, as the option you can pic are kind of vague and overlap each other a bit.
In the end I chose “Offers unique features or gameplay” as I feel that the gameplay does not very much on the different maps, despite the more macro oriented big maps and the smaller all in maps. Also I think this will also “Produce enjoyable games to watch” as you might see more different tactics. Also I think that unique features rewards players that try something new to take advantage of the map and do not just play their standard game to perfection over and over again.
But with this in mind, I also want to mention that map art style is kind of important. I am not really talking about beautiful maps, but rather about maps that are not too dark or too light (if this is possible).

I would also like, if you could somehow mark the 4 player maps on the loading screen, which have some kind of spawning restriction (like only cross spawns etc) and indicate the possible spawns somehow.

Join the Conversation