ESV 2 year anniversary pack: interview with the mappers

Namrufus – God’s Garden 

z

 

Hi Namrufus, thanks for doing this interview, first of all, congratulations on being one of the map makers in the ESV anniversary pack!
 ESV_ Namrufus: thanks!

 

You are one of the newer members of the ESV team, was it surprising to be included in this map pack?

ESV_ Namrufus: Well, I was surprised when Diamond first contacted me and asked me to become part of the ESV mapmaking team, but it was our choice to contribute to the AE map pack

 

And this is your first map that you have done while working for ESV?
ESV_ Namrufus: Yes it is the first map that's gotten close to 'finished', though I do have a couple of other works in progress I've started since I've joined the team.
 

On to the map, God’s Garden, why did you pick this map to port to Starcraft 2?

ESV_ Namrufus: Well I wanted to pick a map that was fairly well known with some history, and that might translate well to SC2. I never really followed BW, though I know of some of the more famous maps, so I took a look at some of the threads on Teamliquid discussing BW maps and the list of maps on Liquipedia for some interesting map ideas. I tried a number of them out in the editor and decided to go with God's garden.

 

The map has a feature that has been a failure so far in SC2, a back expansion, did you consider leaving it out and are you afraid of how it will effect gameplay?

ESV_ Namrufus: Yeah that is the most interesting part of the map IMO. The other maps that have backdoor expansions have of course not been received well. However, leaving the backdoor out of God's garden remake would really make it not much of a remake. In contrast to Calm Before the Storm, this map's backdoor expansion is a 6 mineral 1 high yield gas (6m1hyg) half base instead of a full standard expansion. it is also overlooked by a droppable high ground area. This is to hopefully prevent the kind of boring easy 3 base play seen on calm before the storm as the backdoor base will be both more vulnerable and less rewarding. Though of course it is difficult to tell without more testing how exactly this will effect the map as it is fairly nonstandard.

 

What major changes did you have to change when you were recreating God’s Garden?

ESV_ Namrufus: Yes, there have been a number of changes, from the BW original. The largest of which is the inclusion of an extra half base near the center of the map, this is basically to help smooth out the expansion pattern. As you might notice, in the original the only expansions possible on the map are the mains, the inbase naturals, and the 'outer' naturals. Basically, after your thrid base, all possible 4ths are very far away. This doesn't work as well in SC2, especially with the main, inabase and nat having only 2.5 bases worth of minerals. The central half base is to provide a opportunity to take a 4th that isn't a bazillion miles away.

 

In Brood War, the map was known for being Zerg favored, do you expect this to change in Starcraft 2?
ESV_ Namrufus:  I can't say for sure at this point, calm before the storm, a map with some similar features was protoss favored. Though of course I've tried my best to maintain balance when creating the map, there isn't much data about how inbase naturals like this effect balance.

How far do you think this map can go?

ESV_ Namrufus: I would love for it to go far, I mean, why wouldn't I :) . However it is still a very nonstandard setup and I think something like this still needs more testing and thought.

 

Thanks a lot for the interview, do you have any shout outs you want to give or anything you want to say

ESV_ Namrufus: OK, thanks! I would like to say thanks to everyone thats helped me on the Teamliquid SC2 Mapping forums or created helpful content there. I would also like to thank the ESV mapping team and Diamond, thanks guys!
Also to anyone who hasn't seen it, take a look at the MOTM mapping contest: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=347062 There are usually a lot of new, good maps.

 

Monitor - Bloody Ridge

Hi Monitor, thanks for doing this interview, first of all, congratulations on being one of the map makers in the ESV anniversary pack!

ESV_Monitor: Thank you! I am very glad to have the opportunity to have my map released in the ESV Anniversary Edition map pack.

 

You picked the map “Bloody Ridge”. Do you have any special ties with this map?

ESV_Monitor: Bloody Ridge is a map that I've always admired from Brood War. Not because it was particularly well balanced, but because of its clever design and good use of the space (for the most part). When I looked over maps from Brood War that I could try remaking in Starcraft 2, it stuck out as one that would carry over between the games very well.

 

You mention balance, and looking at the BW stats for the map, you see a slight Terran favor, do you fear this will translate to sc2?

ESV_Monitor: I don't fear that too much. The two games aren't entirely congruent- most of the balance rules from Brood War don't apply in the same way to SC2. My remake also contains a lot of major changes to the original, such as redesigning the natural and third to account for the differences in each games balance. And of course I had to consider PvP 4Gates when redesigning the flat main and natural choke.

 

Did you ever consider another map other than bloody ridge?

ESV_Monitor: Yes! In fact I remade a couple maps before deciding that Bloody Ridge was the right one. First I tried Match Point, but I couldn't get it to work since the proportions are very different between the two games. An easy example of this is that expansions in SC2 take up a lot more space than they did in BW, so doing a straight remake is nearly impossible. After Match Point I tried Destination, Fighting Spirit, and Jade but none worked out like I hoped.

 

Let’s talk changes, you mentioned a few that you had to make, to make 4 gate hold able, were there any other changes you were forced to make?

ESV_Monitor: The biggest part of the map that I changed is the first four bases. The only part that I absolutely had to change was finding a solution to the flat main choke. I ended up with a solution, thanks to help from the rest of the ESV team, that allows the flat choke to function practically the same as a ramp using Line of Sight blockers, a 1-Forcefield wide choke, and defenders highground.
Other than this change, I also decided to redesign the first three bases. You'll find that in my remake there are only 3 bases clustered into the bottom left and top right areas of the map, instead of 4 like in the original. This way I got to use inbase natural and fit an island in as a fourth or fifth expansion for each player. Additionally, it helped me avoid the problem of the proportions of cliffs and expansions being very different between SC2 and BW.

 

Island expos aren't being used much in sc2 at the moment, do you think you've found a way to make them work?

ESV_Monitor: I hope so. The only islands so far in SC2 have been for the most part a failure, because they don't account for the metagame in the match ups. For example, in PvZ, Protoss has a difficult time taking the island on Metropolis or Sanshorn Mist because it is highly vulnerable to mutalisks and brood lord harass in the lategame. Breaking the rocks on Metropolis is also a nuisance for players. In my remake of Bloody Ridge I hope to change that. The islands are positioned so they don't need to be defended with mass turrets or marines that are abonded there. Instead, the islands can be easily defended from the lowground behind the mineral line or by using blink stalkers (in Protoss match ups). As a bonus to help defending, there is a XelNaga Tower on the island which can spot any air harassment or drops coming from the opponent.

 

With these changes, do you think it will be well received among the Sc2 crowd, seeing as how island expos haven't been all that popular, and might turn some people off?

ESV_Monitor: I predict the SC2 audience will view Bloody Ridge with mixed opinions. If I speak candidly, most of the maps we've seen in SC2 have not been experimental. The problem is that no tournament wants to use a map that could be imbalanced or that players/viewers could dislike. As a result most mapmakers stick to the standards of mapmaking. So, inevitably, a lot of viewers and players will be uncomfortable with the map strictly because it has a lot of new features that nobody is used to. That said, I believe all of the features are reasonable and will work. Of the changes that I've made, I always try to keep the metagame balance and strategies in mind so I don't cause imbalance or ruin the current builds/strategies. My goal with this map is to use some new ideas and encourage new play styles without messing anything up.

 

How far do you think this map will go, tournament wise?

ESV_Monitor: Haha that's a risky question for a mapmaker, what I hope and what is reality is very different! In practical terms, I think this map is a potential candidate for use in the Korean Weekly. Beyond that, I'm not sure how many large tournaments and organizations will want to use it since it is on the experimental side. However, I don't want to jinx anything, because there's always hope that it will be popular!

 

Final question, any shout outs or thanks you want to give?

ESV_Monitor: I'd like to give a special shoutout to Nightmarjoo for giving me a lot of guidance on this map and mapmaking in general. Another thanks to Plexa, who always helps me test (and in this case, we tested PvP, which is very kind of him ^^). And lastly, I would like to thank the ESV map team and Diamond for helping with map testing, feedback, and promotion.

 

Gfire-Gauntlet AE

Hi Gfire, thanks for doing this interview, first of all, congratulations on being one of the map makers in the ESV anniversary pack! You picked the map Gauntlet, was there any special reason for picking this map?

ESV_Gfire: I was already working on this remake before I knew about the AE pack. I saw Gauntlet TG on Liquipedia many months ago and I thought it had a cool layout, and I wanted to remake it for SC2. This is actually my second attempt at it.

 

What happened with your first attempt?

ESV_Gfire: I believe I got a new computer and didn’t transfer any of my maps over. I just thought it would be better to start from scratch anyway, since I would only make better maps in the future and none of my old ones, at that point, were very good. I don’t think it was very good, anyway.

 

Was there anything about the map that you feared would translate badly to SC2?

ESV_Gfire: The original map had an interesting structure around the main and natural bases. They were one level lower, where the main had a flat choke and then there was a ramp down into the natural. I originally was trying something more like that but me and the ESV team thought it was unnecessarily complicated and would probably ruin PvP, so I changed it to a more regular main/nat setup.

I also had to add a base in the top and bottom locations to work as an easier third, which I had known I would have to do since I originally looked at the map.

 

What was the biggest thing that you had to remake for this map to be playable for SC2?

ESV_Gfire: In the original it was rather hard to expand, and there were only a few bases for each player. I had to make it easier to take the natural expansion, and the third, so players could play solid macro games on it. Along with this, I used regular SC2 mineral/gas counts so expansions would follow SC2 standards.

 

Another map in the pack, Colosseum I believe, has been reworked from 4 player to 3 player, did you ever consider making adding on a starting location?

ESV_Gfire: I really liked the design and the way the whole map fit together when I saw Gauntlet TG, so I never really thought about changing it. I generally prefer to work with 2 player maps, anyway.

 

TLPD has little information on race favors on this map, having very few recorded games played on it, what race do you think will enjoy this map the most, and what features do you think will make that happen.

ESV_Gfire: I think the most extreme features of the map are the unblocked islands, which can be shot at from the low ground, and the very tight choke to defend the third base. I think Terran players will enjoy the islands the most because they can float Command Centers there quite easily and also can use tanks to easily deny an opponent’s island base. As far as the third base goes, I’m not sure exactly which race it will favor. I think it’s similar to Entombed Valley in this sense, and the metagame on that map has been evolving a lot lately.

 

Do you think people will enjoy playing it?

ESV_Gfire: I think some people will enjoy it. It depends on what types of playstyles they like. I think it encourages longer games and probably a lot of drops, counter attacks and harassment, but not straight-up attacks as much.

 

How far do you think this map has a chance to go?

ESV_Gfire: Well, Gauntlet has been around for a very long time, originally a Blizzard map for SC1, I think it would be fun to see its legacy carried on, even if it wasn’t played a lot in pro matches. Realistically, it’s hard to get any map to be used very much, but once it is, if it’s good, it will stick around for a while. If it’s used at all, I think this map has the potential to go quite far, unless there are nforeseen, drastic changes in the metagame which make it outdated.

 

And lastly, any shout outs?

ESV_Gfire: Thanks for interviewing me about the map. I’d like to thank whoever worked onprevious versions of Gauntlet, at Blizzard and the MSL/MBC, and shoutout to Liquipedia and TLPD. Also shoutout to the entire team liquid mapping community. Thanks ESV tv (esvtv.com) and the ESV mapmaking team. Check out the ESV Korean Weekly where our maps are used, sponsored by Tt Esports, make sure to watch the ESV Korean Weekly Grand Prix final this Saturday, casted by Orb and TLO.

 

Timetwister – Odd-Eye

Hi Alec, thanks for doing this interview, first of all, congratulations on being one of the map makers in the ESV anniversary pack!

Timetwister: Thanks :)

 

Was there any special reason for picking this map and was there any other maps you also were considering?

Timetwister: Well, I didn't play much Broodwar, so I was actually thinking of not participating. Though, when I came across Odd-Eye it was essentially a perfect Starcraft2 port. There were a few other maps that had some really cool things that I wouldn't have minded trying, but I was pretty sure I couldn't make certain features work out in sc2.

 

How did you come across Odd-eye? did you just sit down and look through liquipedia, or watch an old BW game ?

Timetwister: Diamond actually directed me to liquipedia when I told the team I was on the fence about participating. I went through just about all maps posted there, and thought Odd-Eye was certainly the best choice.

 

If you couldn't pick Odd-Eye, what would you then pick?

ESV_Timetwister: I was considering taking a swing and Match Point, though high ground advatage isn't as strong in sc2, so it would have certainly been more of a challenge.

 

Let’s talk a bit about the map, it's pretty straight forward when it comes to taking expansion, did you think about changing it?

ESV_Timetwister: That map itself is almost a direct port from the Broodwar version, with the exception of the middle, which is the primary reason I picked it, it's a nearly perfect port. But I did have some thoughts about changing the third. As of right now it's very easy to defend considering its close and has a narrow bridge leading to it. I could see this contributing to the 3 base cap problem we so often hear about in sc2.

 

You mention changing the middle, what did you change there?

ESV_Timetwister: The original had only two bridges, and the only path to get from the southwest part of the map was to go through the high ground bases across from the naturals. When porting the map into the sc2 editor, the spacing was much different, so adding another bridge seemed ideal. Then I just added those small routes from the open middle areas that lead to the southwest part of the map to add some variety in pathing.

 

The map has a lot of chokes, and as you said an easy third, do you think protoss will have an advantage? Considering force fields and storm/colossus.

ESV_Timetwister: Possibly, though in many other ways the other races have nice advatages as well. There are several attack paths to pick from, so runbys and counter attacks are certainly feasible for zerg. Not to mention the main-3rd set-up makes air harass and drops quite strong against any protoss or terran who sits on 3 base. And terran too can take advatage of the chokes with nice tank lines.

 

yes, Byun style TvP could certainly become a possibility here, you, but other than that, how do you think this map will play out? The other maps have mostly been long macro maps, will this break the trend?

ESV_Timetwister: This map could certainly lean into marco style games, but I feel once fourth bases start being taken, player might become much more aggressive. In the case of this map, the player has two fourth options, and both can force you to expand toward your enemy. If both player take the high ground fourth, there is going to be tons of tension. Same goes for the low ground open fourth. Of course, I don't think we'll see a protss and a terran take the same fourths, but you could see a zerg take their low ground open fourth, then a terran taking the same open fourth with a planetary. But I feel overall this map certainly leans macro, especially with how safe the third feels.

 

Most maps have perfect symmetry, Odd-Eye does not, how do you think this will play out?

ESV_Timetwister: The symmetry is quite odd. Though maps like this have been done before, they've failed because the design lead to the north east section of expansions will be harder to hold than the southwest side expansions. Thus, the player that had to take the northeasy expansion where at a disadvantage. On odd-eye, I feel that if one player took the southwest section, and the other took the northeast, they're both pretty even as far as vulnerabilities. Nevertheless, I'm excited to see which players fight for which section to benefit their strategy the most.

 

In general, do you wish more maps would choose asymmetry over symmetry?

ESV_Timetwister: Well, this map does have perfect symmetry if you cut the map from the top right corner to the bottom left, but it does have an asymmetric approach since both players will most likely be taking different fourths and fifths. And I really find that super cool, as long as each section of expansions has a general sense of balance to where it's not obvious that one section is better than the other.

 

Do you have any fears about the map, imbalance or otherwise?

ESV_Timetwister: I do worry about the third, and how easy it can be to defend. Though, I feel if players can adapt and lean toward a more drop/harass style play, they can quite easily break someone sitting on three base. I am worried slightly aboutt the fourths also, since both players will most likely taken different fourths. So I am concerned that one is better than the other, especailly in TvP, but I think it will play out well.

 

As a competitive map, how do you think it will turn out, will tournaments use it?

ESV_Timetwister: Well, I certainly hope they do I haven't seen a map like this in competitive play, and I would most certainly like to since it has quite a different approach than other two player maps.

 

OK, that's about all I have, thanks for the interivew! Do you have any shout outs or thanks?

ESV_Timetwister: Just like to thank ESV for giving me a chance to do what I love doing. If you haven't already, you should certainly check out the ESV Korean Weekly where you can see our awesome ESV maps in play. :D

 

SUPEROUMAN – Colosseum

 

Hi SUPEROUMAN, thanks for doing this interview, first of all, congratulations on being one of the map makers in the ESV anniversary pack! You picked the map Colosseum, was there any special reason for picking this map?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: Actually, it's diamond who gave me the suggestion to make a 3 players map version of colosseum, i fully understand his decision since i have the most experience with 3 players maps in the team.
I accepted his suggestion because making this map is quite a challenge, it's already a 3players map which is by default hard to make, but also the flat choke was really hard to do because it must be either 0 or 90° so doing it on a map where 30° are dominant was a pain for my brain.
The main/natural/third expansion setup is also totally different from what was been seen before, it's quite similar to Bloody Ridge but different enough to make it stand alone

 

This being a 3 player map is to me really exciting, we don't see many of those, do you think the 3 player map is too hard to create?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: it's very hard for sure but not *too* hard, most of people don't realize that it's a lot easier to make them in sc2 than in bw because you can adapt you map size to your layout. However i think making 3 player maps with the way i did testbug and colosseum isn't the best one, it's just the easiest.
The best way is to distord the map symetry to make it fit perfectly in a square but keep the exact distances between important parts of the map for all players (natural to natural distance, the distance between the natural and some key point to control on the map) People are certainly afraid of making them since it requires a lot more time than a 2 or 4 player map and they won't necessarily have the reward to get some good amount of games played on them.

 

Looking at the map, it seems that the top base would be easier to attack with air units, like mutas, banshees or void rays, than the other bases, because of the extra space between the 2. and 3. when creating the map, did you ever think about creating some sort of boundary?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: This is the toughest part of making a 3p map the way i do it, i will always have expands that are more vulnerable than the same ones elsewhere on the map. I try to limit it as much as possible but it will never be great. I thought about No Fly Zones but they don't work well on large areas, it messes up the pathing of air units a lot and they may fly over areas where the player didn't intend to send them at all. For example, you will send a medivac into a corner of the map blocked by no fly zones, it will constanty try to get there and it may pass over ennemy units while searching its way

 

Now other than making a 4 player map into 3 player map, what big changes did you make?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: The main/natural/third layout is nearly intact, i mostly changed the middle. When you look at the original version it's very open with just some little walls in the middle. In order to try to make it more interesting, i placed two chokes on the shortest path between two mains and put an open middle for later stages of the game. I did that to make the map more dynamic, while the position of the chokes will not matter in the earlygame because they are closer to the middle than the main bases unlike on Cloud Kingdom. I think these side paths will be more used for harass possibilities.

 

You've mentioned that in making Testbug, and now Colosseum that you've used "the easy way". Would you ever make a 3 player map "The hard way"?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: I think i should do it at least once, but i will need to have a good layout in mind so make as few changes as possibles after the map is made because i won't use any symetry. The easiest way to make this kind of maps is a layout like outsider (http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/korean/maps/241_Outsider_SE) or outlier (http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/korean/maps/504_Outlier) using that outer ring of expands.

 

The other maps, if you look at BW stats, have had some race being better, some even having 70% winrates, Colosseum however is fairly balanced, all having around 50% winrates, does this help ease your nerves about map balance?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: It doesn't matter for me, the interactions of units with the terrain are different in bw, so it's a total stats reset for sc2

 

OK, do you think people will enjoy playing on this map?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: It will certainly be a different sc2 experience for a lot of them, i already got some feedback saying that the map is strange but in a positive way.

 

Do you think tournaments will pick it up?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: It's possible but most of the tournaments are reluctant to try untested
new maps and since Colosseum is even more different, the map will need to get some games in the Korean Weekly before tournaments think about trying it.

 

And lastly, Any shout outs or thanks you want to give?

ESV_SUPEROUMAN: Sure, I'll like to thank Diamond for giving me the idea of making Colossus, you can also follow me on twitter @ESV_SUPEROUMAN where I mostly tweet about maps. And happy holidays everyone!