Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

[superfrog]

Been playing on Honor a lot this week.

[caps]

Is there no minimum number of votes required? Seems like it would need to be at least 2.

[superfrog]

There is no minimum. We could discuss it, seems like a fine idea, although it raises a question of what to do with a map that only gets one upvote. Is it rejected? Seems like yes is the only answer, but that doesn’t seem quite fair.

[Sir Heroscape]

Originally Posted by caps

Is there no minimum number of votes required? Seems like it would need to be at least 2.

Originally Posted by superfrog

There is no minimum. We could discuss it, seems like a fine idea, although it raises a question of what to do with a map that only gets one upvote. Is it rejected? Seems like yes is the only answer, but that doesn’t seem quite fair.

right...that was my next comment. Seems like there should be a minimum of 2 or 3. would be a bit odd to induct maps based on the premise that "no review means the map is fine". Not that that's what ya'll are doing/saying...just probably a good practice to have more than one opinion presented if there's a judging or inducting element to a project.

[ThrasherDarkrai]

Originally Posted by superfrog

There is no minimum. We could discuss it, seems like a fine idea, although it raises a question of what to do with a map that only gets one upvote. Is it rejected? Seems like yes is the only answer, but that doesn’t seem quite fair.

I have to say (building on Sir Heroscape's comment above) that this statement threw me for a loop. To my understanding, the very reason the Wargrounds of Scape even has a time limit is that it represents a commitment from the judges to the community: that any map submitted will get reviewed by the judges, one way or another. The idea that a map can be inducted into the Wargrounds of Scape based solely on the review of a single judge - out of a panel of seven - seems to me to constitute an abrogation of this commitment, at least in spirit. If anything, I would flip your formulation around: were a map's deadline to hypothetically pass with it only having only a single positive review, it would be unfair to induct it into the Wargrounds of Scape, since the very fact that it only received a single review - that none of the other judges felt strongly enough about the map to submit reviews before the deadline - should, in itself, serve as an indictment. This goes double for Honor, the map under discussion, because its only review at present was written by the person who nominated it to begin with.

Now, having said all of this, I have every confidence the rest of the judges will submit reviews for Honor prior to its deadline. Not every judge has reviewed every inducted map, but all but two of the maps inducted since WoS' revival have been reviewed by at least four judges, and I fully expect that to remain true for Honor. My point, however, remains the same: it is in fact quite fair to expect a map to need more than one review to be inducted into the Wargrounds of Scape, especially if said singular review was authored by the person who nominated the map (as is the case with Honor).

[cmgames]

Word.

~Z

[superfrog]

I don’t anticipate that a map would ever time out with only one vote. And it’s not really possible to “pull a fast one” with our process; if judges decide after induction that they don’t like a map, they can nominate it for re-evaluation to potentially get it removed.

[OEAO]

With four maps all timing out within one week of each other (an issue that has been rectified moving forward with our update to the timer), I would expect votes to be cast quite close to, or at, the deadline.

[Flash_19]

Percolator by @Ulysses

I’m a big fan of this map. While I was initially hesitant about what appeared to be a pull to the right, development proved to be smooth across all parts of the map. The jungle pieces are placed extremely well to help developing units to the left, and the staircase effect of the terrain to the right combined with the ruin placement causes the rapid height gain to come at a cost of potentially sacrificing some movement, yet not too much that it feels like it hinders play too much. Ruin placement is fantastic, and this map has convinced me that allowing for two small ruins or two large ruins on a map is mostly a good thing, though I realize the potential inconveniences that could cause.

I don’t normally like jungle pieces covering level 3, and Percolator has quite a few level 3 spots covered by jungle. While I wish that number of covered spaces was reduced by at least 2, I’m not sure how you build the map in a better way that allows that to happen. The potential movement through the middle combined with ruin placement helps limit the strength of those positions.

I love the clear crisp start zones, the pathing is interesting and engaging, melee versus range matchups don’t favor range, and range versus range doesn’t turn into a staredown. Percolator checks the boxes for me. I vote to induct Percolator into WoS.


Aftermath by @Sir Heroscape

Playtesting confirmed my initial worries about this map – the map pulls right to the point of being problematic. It is far too easy to grab high ground to the right and set up a decent pod, even with the ruin placement (this is even more true for the small ruin side). It feels like battlements have been used to try and hinder development on the right side, but the placement of those battlements really don’t accomplish much, and the inclusion of the ladder on the right side out of the start zone only aggravates the problem. While I didn’t test this build specifically, a greenscales/dragon build can set up shop on the highest ground too easily and quickly.

Ravines are tricky to get right on a map, and with this one, the ravine is quite deep in spots with three or 4 movement being required to get from the double hex wide road back up onto height again. This will lead to figures struggling at times with getting from one side to the other. From my experience with the map, this is particularly true for double based melee figures. I think the way this ravine is positioned also allows for some potentially frustrating instances of double base denial that can be too punishing. The ladders in the ravine help slightly (though not with double based figures), but not enough to make a significant difference.

I feel like the middle side sections would benefit greatly from being reworked (basically the level 3 road and everything adjacent to it – including tree placement, battlements, and all the level 4 height), and I definitely want to see some changes to development out the right side of the start zone.

I vote to induct Aftermath.

[superfrog]

Honor by Flash_19


I think Honor's best feature is its center, with the double road going forward and the height island in the middle, flanked by higher height on the edges. The map plays best when this is utilized by both armies, as the flanking potential is very high.

What I struggled with in my experience of this map is that occasionally gameplay on this map can squish to the sides, especially with smaller armies and armies that rely heavily on a single one-hex figure (Moltenclaw/Greenies, for one). If you line up concentrated in one SZ half that is directly across from where your opponent lined up, the gameplay can be a bit cramped and stale (it's super symmetrical if you stay on this 45% of the map, and not in a fun way.

Fortunately this doesn't happen unless both players force it to, and I don't find the map unbalanced in these games either, just less interesting to play. So I give Honor an to induct.

I will note that this map was created for the split SZ map contest, and I don't think that the split SZs are actually beneficial to the map (as they can lead to the aforementioned half-map squished gameplay). I think this map could be improved by a more standard start zone that emphasized the center of the map more. The current implementation does have some helps to mitigate the split (the level 1 road, for example), but I feel like those are fighting a problem (yes, a small one) that doesn't need to exist.

[superfrog]

Yngvild Pass by Sheep


Yngvild Pass is a really fun map. I watched several OHS games on it last week and it really made for good games across all the matchups that I was able to see.

Obviously it's most similar to Platypus, but it has two major advantages (both relating to the glyph areas) that in my opinion make it a superior map.

The first benefit is that the glyph area has an extra hex of width. This means it doesn't get clogged in the same way that Platypus can, and the glyph areas flow more freely.

The second benefit is that the central passages are also an extra hex wide, meaning that the level 3 run can be attacked from both sides. This is accomplished without adding much extra width to the map vs. Platypus (16 vs. 15 hexes wide) because the divider between the central lane and the glyph section is 0 hexes wide (a ruin) vs. 2 hexes wide (a 4-hex glacier).

I find the subtle asymmetry of the 2 ruins here very nice, both configurations protect the glyph from LoS on most/all of the level 3 run, and then the ruins are placed to avoid choke points as much as possible from there. With Percolator getting some upvotes recently, I'll just say here that this map would work nicely with either double small ruin or double large ruin, or (obviously) the way it's presented here.

I had one person ask me how a map can be good with so much height being same-level (26 level-3 hexes). I will note that this is comparable to some other WoS maps (Platypus has 18, H&D has 24), but I'll also point out that all the height runs here have some forward momentum to them, which means that in practice none of them feel campy.

to induct.

[Typhon2222]

Originally Posted by superfrog

Yngvild Pass by Sheep


Yngvild Pass is a really fun map. I watched several OHS games on it last week and it really made for good games across all the matchups that I was able to see.

Obviously it's most similar to Platypus, but it has two major advantages (both relating to the glyph areas) that in my opinion make it a superior map.

The first benefit is that the glyph area has an extra hex of width. This means it doesn't get clogged in the same way that Platypus can, and the glyph areas flow more freely.

The second benefit is that the central passages are also an extra hex wide, meaning that the level 3 run can be attacked from both sides. This is accomplished without adding much extra width to the map vs. Platypus (16 vs. 15 hexes wide) because the divider between the central lane and the glyph section is 0 hexes wide (a ruin) vs. 2 hexes wide (a 4-hex glacier).

I find the subtle asymmetry of the 2 ruins here very nice, both configurations protect the glyph from LoS on most/all of the level 3 run, and then the ruins are placed to avoid choke points as much as possible from there. With Percolator getting some upvotes recently, I'll just say here that this map would work nicely with either double small ruin or double large ruin, or (obviously) the way it's presented here.

I had one person ask me how a map can be good with so much height being same-level (26 level-3 hexes). I will note that this is comparable to some other WoS maps (Platypus has 18, H&D has 24), but I'll also point out that all the height runs here have some forward momentum to them, which means that in practice none of them feel campy.

to induct.

High praise, @Sheep !