Recognizing and Officializing Excellence as Found in Mr. Bean and Zones Maps

[LiveFreeorDie]

I love logic lol. If you could bring some to the table I'd be delighted.

1. You haven't explained how Mr. Bean is unbalanced. I haven't seen anyone else complain about Mr. Bean being unbalanced.

2. It hasn't been proven that unbalanced maps are not good maps or fun maps or maps worth playing (as obviously the unbalanced GOW classic has a lot of devotees).

3. If unbalanced maps should not be used for ladder, unbalanced ones that are currently valid should have their status removed, including GOW. There would be a major outcry from everyone if GOW were invalidated, therefore the community as a whole supports unbalanced maps being valid for ladder 1s so long as the play value and enjoyability are there.

4. I'll repeat the question again since you missed it previously. How is Mr. Bean unbalanced? I don't think it is, and certainly not to the same degree as GOW is unbalanced, even if microscopic discrepancies in favor of some start spot(s) could be discovered.

[Szwagier]

ok i will show

place where u can tower/cat your enemy



middle got 3, few spot got 2, few got 1, still balance map?


i know in your skill its fine but if u want "real" map when map will be fair and some1 wont win cause he got better spot

and i said it many times, GOW IS UNBALANCE, but ppl play it cause they know ONE MAP

[LiveFreeorDie]

Ok, at least now I kind of know what you're saying, but I think it's a stretch to say it's unbalanced in the true sense of the term. I mean, in 1s, how many different spots are you going to tower/cat at a time? If you tower middle spot in 3 places, won't you disadvantage yourself by using too much res? Mid player can make cats and kill them all, can't he? Obviously you're higher skill level by far and maybe you see things I don't, but GOW is for sure a much more unbalanced map and ppl play it all day over and over and over again. Unbalanced doesn't mean unfun, the evidence shows.

Say it's team game and 2 people target middle at diff spots. Won't the towerers be vulnerable at home base from mid player's allies?

I mean, to get a 100% balanced map in every microscopic detail, you'd have to play straight squares that are geometrically identical in all areas. I think a lot of people enjoy the aesthetic appeal of a more natural looking layout, although geometrically symmetrical maps can be nice also, as in the example of Zones.

Swag how many games have you actually played on Mr. Bean?

I've been thinking of organizing a fun round robin tourney for my level players that anchors on the maps Mr. Bean and Zones, but I think I'd also like to open up a separate competition for the upper level players if they aren't too shy to try.

I've talked to some ppl already but finding a good time is tricky because people are in all diff time zones so no matter what time, it would seem someone gets left out.

[Szwagier]

Map should be balance in 1s 2s 3s and 4s
If u are making balance for 2s that mean this is bad map
OK another few spots like right bottom can  rape his peons only if dk will be in his base, mid spot can be rape by dk from top, let, right and bottom

[Lambchops]

HAH... or then you could take a map like GOW that is so totally unbalanced that people routinely walk half way accross the map before building from 2 out of 8 spots. WTF?

It is the differences between the spots... each with their strengths and weaknesses that make for rich gameplay.

Even with maps that have "perfectly" balanced spots like chop or bgh, the spots still have their own characteristics because of the inherantly non-symmetrical mechanics of the game.

[Szwagier]

You make stupid question, it should be YES/NO now i see 5 negative vs 4 positive

[Igognito]

For once I will agree with u8...

The poll should be:
Yes - please include the maps
No - do not include the maps
Conditional Yes - Include after small revise (for example peon spots)

Also the poll should not be whether we like or not the maps.
For example I do not like Mr Bean but I do not mind if it is included or not... There are plenty of maps that I do not like that are part of the ladder folder.

[Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart)]

Strong disagree with Szwagier.  Ladder maps as they exist on our server consist of every Blizzard map, because all Blizzard map games are logged for the ladder.  Therefore the standard for this map to qualify shouldn't be "every single thing has to be symmetrical and equal," because that's certainly not true of many many Blizzard maps.  It just has to be balanced enough not to be a joke of a map, and Mr. Bean easily qualifies, and tbqh the winner is very, very rarely going to come down to spots as far as I can tell.  If it's not equal enough for Szwagier, then he wouldn't have to host or join it, but basically he's being stupid and a dick.  Personally, I think the totally symmetrical maps are usually sort of boring, and as Lambchops pointed out, they're still not really equal anyway.  Yes to Mr Bean, firm no to Zones, which is too basic of a map to be worthy of a special addition.  That's not an option on the poll so I won't vote

[Szwagier]

yes sure cause i belive we should make a fair map and make championship not again at gow or maybe just tours (@XuRnT ??)on new map and  would be nice it will be balance map

Forest trail/btbc isnt symmetrical but its balanced map

blind dick is you

[Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart)]

It's up to you to play maps you designate as fair enough for you, and up to tourney hosters to pick maps that you like, but there's objectively nothing about Mr. Bean that makes it less fair than a large number of currently valid maps for ladder - which, again, is ALL Blizzard maps. 

I don't know if anyone actually cares about Mr. Bean besides Babyshark but if a bunch of people do, no reason it shouldn't be added. 

For you to try to say it's too unfair is dishonest if you compare it to what else is out there, and for you to say other people don't understand because they're not as good at War2 as you is just extremely arrogant

[mousEtopher]

well said blid, very much agree! idk that many people care much in general about the ladder map selection but both these maps have been pretty widely played by a good amount of people at this point, and at least one bunch enjoyed it enough to continue hosting it on their own after i signed off which impressed me! I'm in favor of adding these & other quality customs to the ladder pool, it seems easy enough to do & not many/any downsides that i can see. as with current ladder picks no one has to play anything they don't want to

another thought -- if i were to set up a site that tracks which maps are hosted in order of frequency like that usa-archer site (seems not hard to do & map get around to it sometime) that could be another metric for determining whether or not to add maps.

[LiveFreeorDie]

Swag mentioned something along these lines in the Custom Map Recognition thread:

I remember there was stats about ru.server maps,players

we can also add if map was playing 100(50?) times in month as another rule to add new map

[Player]

I’ve played both of these.  Mr Bean is an ok map, better than some of the current ladder maps and has a few unique things about it that make it fun.

Zones isn’t that fun.  Too symmetrical and too much open space. 

[LiveFreeorDie]

The current numbers at the poll show that the community overwhelmingly wants to officialize Mr. Bean and Zones and have them included for ladder and included in a new edition of War2Combat.

It looks like Mr. Bean and Zones have received the welcome wagon and now we just need to figure out who will be the one to do the honors, to go down in history as the Official Officiator of Mr. Bean and Zones. Forever.

I'm thinking a Map Initiation Ceremony.

We need a master of ceremonies, someone to send out invitations, a few plaques, a DJ, the works.

It will be an event to remember.

[Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart)]

I think most people like Mr Bean more, ive seen three different people (thats counting myself) say Zones is a notyhing map...