Say u have an amazing 12 player map. U just start a game for 5min realtime, and redo it over and over.
After 10 hours u have 100 games. If your map was good, it will stay there until next reset.
Buged SC2 system:
the reset limit was 18 hours.
Just play 3 time with 12 players for 30min and u need to push it again.
There is no sense to push it, but your map will still be played.
Unknown map has more chance to be known.
New SC2 system:
No possibility to push a game.
U have to make a game that is good for any numbers of players.
The single player part is for the beginning, for explorers.
The multiplayer part will prevent that game being boring again.
You seem to equate unique with hard to learn. A lot of people equate complexity with hard to learn, but this one is even worse. Hard to learn is its own thing.
BNET players are perfectly happy to try unique takes on a genre, and even reward these maps. I'd say Star Battle is quite a bit different than your typical AoS. BNET players are not willing to stick with games that are hard to learn though.
If players get confused and leave, that is the map's fault. Clearly it wasn't an isolated incident. You need to take some blame here for creating a hard to learn map. Know your audience.
I intend to release (not imminently) a very unique and extremely complex map relative to the genre. But, it will be easy to learn. Let's see how it fares.
Creating a map that is easy to learn while adding elements unique to the genre can be difficult. Karawasa is correct in that it is your fault if players do not learn the map quickly enough, but you shouldn't give up because of it. Just try different ways of introducing the gameplay to the player.
In my TD, players can build bunkers in addition to towers. Players must put units in the bunkers for them to attack. However, players would not pay attention to the description, and build units without bunkers. They'd complain that they don't work.
I attempted to solve this by making units require at least one constructed bunker before they can be trained. This solved the unit problem. But it opened a new one.
Now, players will mass bunkers without units because they are the cheapest tower. It is very difficult to explain the simplest concepts to new players in one game. You have to put instructional text in exactly the right places at exactly the right time. If you put too much information in one spot, most of it will be ignored. If you present too much information at one time, most of it will be ignored.
I would like to dispute the graph on grounds of subjectivity; I think SotIS is extremely good (and it's on the first page), as well as Desert Strike (and possibly Bunker Wars). :)
I would like to dispute the graph on grounds of subjectivity; I think SotIS is extremely good (and it's on the first page), as well as Desert Strike (and possibly Bunker Wars). :)
Of course, but their general polish and gameplay aren't bad, its their lack of originality, game-play simplicity, and ease of making(imagine a gold division player in tournaments and versing high level players(master league) and succeeding, you'll understand why many mapmakers dislike these maps.) Most mapmakers view these maps as EZ-mode, and feel that their harder work should be given a chance, yet it is not. Now the reason a lot of the maps on the front page are on the front page is their competitiveness. I wish this wasn't true, but the fact that a majority of the community is a group of very competitive kids and young adults means that maps do not get their fair share when lacking "competition".
Finally, the mapmakers hate the maps on the front page for this very reason. Mapmakers are not competitive, some are very smart, but many are not competitive. They do better in games that don't require natural ethletic (yes I meant ethletic) ability. These "ethletes" are very picky about the maps they like, and currently, these are the maps on the front page. Now, the creator of Zealot Frenzy got very defensive earlier, because his map was on the front page. To be frank, I have played all the maps on the front page, and many of them have polish or lack originality, or lack polish and have competition. But to be frank, they all are mostly tug, aos, or mass games, and they do not deviate. However much physical work was put into them, MINIMAL thought was put into them. I put a lot of thought into my maps, I know rodrigo puts thought into his, and I know a lot of mappers think for HOURS to come up with the kind of maps they make. YES, I said HOURS, we are hard thinkers, and when a mapmaker with minimal skill and minimal thought makes a map that isn't amazing but "mediocre" so to speak, and it becomes part of the front page where other maps are more deserving. That just speaks how one sided the community is. They want very few things from customs, and those that want more, they've created niches in lotr, smashcraft, and debates.
This is where I stop, I feel very passionate about this issue, and I think we have to be more vocal. We should take the chance, and I think we should all submit customer service forms stating explicitly to change the format of the customs map system to how it was when it was bugged. And we should send one form each every two weeks, to keep reminding blizzard, please join me, for we are all injured. We need to scream it everywhere, chat channels, forums, everywhere. Its one for all and all for one here, and its time we went on the mapmaking crusade.
the way i see it is like this, its really easy to pass judgement on stuff you simply do not understand what your talking about, If map makers see some of the first page maps as easy mode, Then go ahead and create them.
Im pretty sure guys such as yourself, would watch my map and be like, This map is EZ mode. Well guess what, Everybody complains about the data editor taking heaps amount of time, Zealot frenzy for instance doesnt take much triggers, HArdly any as a matter of fact, bascailly all u you need is some win /loose /set team triggers and your done, but for the data editor work? think again, this map requires SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTLOADSSSSSSSSS of data editor work. The stuff that makes map makers here tear their hair out it takes so long.
But guess what, Triggers alone dont define how much EFFORT it takes to making any of the so called "ez mode" maps.
If you look at the common theme of all the first page maps, they are all Extremely heavy in data editor work .
I see guys like rodriguo put togeter maps in just a mere 2-3 months , and claim them to be Great amazing deserving maps that clearly wont be in his biased poll of "average maps"
If anybody here took the slightest amount of effort to see what it takes to create such a map as mine, you will Scream in tears at the amount of work. I started ZF since BETA, and i have the youtube video post date to prove it : date posted june 13th
7 months of HARD work , and im still making it up to this day, When maps like Nexas word wars or debates are basically "DONE", Completed, nothing substantial to be added again.
If you look, every map at first page, is a continous never stopping work in delevopement, all the players know that new versions will just keep being pumped out that change the games themselfs drastically and keep things fresh. (and by drastically i mean additions of new Heroes, or new items, or new tech choices, or units or whatever, theres no limit to how much features you can add is the point im making)
So please, before saying certain maps are Ez mode, Actually play them first and try to understand how much effort it actually takes. Ive spent many a day bascially from as i wake up to as i go to sleep mapping ZF, to then hear douchebags like rodrigue just dismiss maps as "average" or "aweful" in a very public poll when rodriguo has nothing to show for it .
You go try making ZF ,
-create 3 custom spells that level up to "6" YES 6 levels in this god forsaken editor, with 3 levels of ultimates also, and have 20+ heroes in the game with all unique abilties following this rule per hero., and make numerous mercs with specially made custom abilties , Go make 50+ upgrades for your units Each indivdually, and 40+ items that arent all just "stat buffers" , then make 5 tiers with 5 units each, and make a unique racial upgrade for each teched unit with its own requirements,
Do level skip requirements for each hero at level 1/4/7/10/13/16 for standard abilties, and 6/11/16 for ultimates and then come back to me and tell me thats an "ez" map to make..
Some guys here ( not all) simply have no clue what it takes.
I see guys like rodriguo put togeter maps in just a mere 2-3 months ,
and claim them to be Great amazing deserving maps that clearly wont be
in his biased poll of "average maps"
Did I claim that? Sorry if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I never said that.
The thing is, how much work you put into it is really irrelevant. What counts is the final product. There is obviously a correlation between these two, but it is not cause and effect. Your thinking is from the perspective of one guy making the map. If you had a team and did it in a month, would it be any less of a map?
If you look, every map at first page, is a continous never stopping work in delevopement, all the players know that new versions will just keep being pumped out that change the games themselfs drastically and keep things fresh. (and by drastically i mean additions of new Heroes, or new items, or new tech choices, or units or whatever, theres no limit to how much features you can add is the point im making)
This is the reason why they stay there, not why they are there in the first place. Nevertheless, I couldn't agree more on the importance of this.
But maps don't stay at the top forever, plenty of maps have risen to the first page then after a couple of weeks go down. Maybe its not as changing as you like but the fact is people find a map they like then they play it constantly for a while.
The maps which stay at the top for what seems like forever manage that because they have larger communities or are very competitive like SOTIS or marine arena.
Also its clearly not true that the maps on the first page have had no effort put in and could be based out in a couple of hours. Other than that occasional new map that for some reason shoots to the number 1 spot and is a broken mess of course ^^
the way i see it is like this, its really easy to pass judgement on stuff you simply do not understand what your talking about, If map makers see some of the first page maps as easy mode, Then go ahead and create them.
Im pretty sure guys such as yourself, would watch my map and be like, This map is EZ mode. Well guess what, Everybody complains about the data editor taking heaps amount of time, Zealot frenzy for instance doesnt take much triggers, HArdly any as a matter of fact, bascailly all u you need is some win /loose /set team triggers and your done, but for the data editor work? think again, this map requires SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTLOADSSSSSSSSS of data editor work. The stuff that makes map makers here tear their hair out it takes so long.
But guess what, Triggers alone dont define how much EFFORT it takes to making any of the so called "ez mode" maps.
If you look at the common theme of all the first page maps, they are all Extremely heavy in data editor work .
I see guys like rodriguo put togeter maps in just a mere 2-3 months , and claim them to be Great amazing deserving maps that clearly wont be in his biased poll of "average maps"
If anybody here took the slightest amount of effort to see what it takes to create such a map as mine, you will Scream in tears at the amount of work. I started ZF since BETA, and i have the youtube video post date to prove it : date posted june 13th
7 months of HARD work , and im still making it up to this day, When maps like Nexas word wars or debates are basically "DONE", Completed, nothing substantial to be added again.
If you look, every map at first page, is a continous never stopping work in delevopement, all the players know that new versions will just keep being pumped out that change the games themselfs drastically and keep things fresh. (and by drastically i mean additions of new Heroes, or new items, or new tech choices, or units or whatever, theres no limit to how much features you can add is the point im making)
So please, before saying certain maps are Ez mode, Actually play them first and try to understand how much effort it actually takes. Ive spent many a day bascially from as i wake up to as i go to sleep mapping ZF, to then hear douchebags like rodrigue just dismiss maps as "average" or "aweful" in a very public poll when rodriguo has nothing to show for it .
You go try making ZF ,
-create 3 custom spells that level up to "6" YES 6 levels in this god forsaken editor, with 3 levels of ultimates also, and have 20+ heroes in the game with all unique abilties following this rule per hero., and make numerous mercs with specially made custom abilties , Go make 50+ upgrades for your units Each indivdually, and 40+ items that arent all just "stat buffers" , then make 5 tiers with 5 units each, and make a unique racial upgrade for each teched unit with its own requirements,
Do level skip requirements for each hero at level 1/4/7/10/13/16 for standard abilties, and 6/11/16 for ultimates and then come back to me and tell me thats an "ez" map to make..
Some guys here ( not all) simply have no clue what it takes.
Your map does not add anything new to the table, it does not expand on frenzy, it is just like footman frenzy, with zealots. I will omit SOTIS, it is not the map which is bad, it is the community. Star Battle was a new idea, I like it, cause it blends competition with the ability to pay a lot of games with a lot of variation. Zealot Frenzy brings nothing to the table, while "Rodriguo's" map brings a whole new concept, and its an incredibly interesting one, I'm glad its on the list. Then, there's maps like Desert Strike, Nexus Wars, mindless games that drew people in for some reason. These maps suck, and they do not admit it. I do not understand these maps, I don't care if you made a spawner in the data editor, I don't care that you made everything in the data editor, I am a data editor myself and I have to say, it can't be more difficult than creating three whole new races from scratch. I'll say that outright. But, in the end, you must understand that the Customs list is flawed, and, speaking generally , to not want it changed is selfish to the mapmaking community as a whole. Personally to you, I hope you want the popularity list changed as well, because if you don't you have nothing to say here.
Your map does not add anything new to the table, it does not expand on frenzy, it is just like footman frenzy, with zealots. I will omit SOTIS, it is not the map which is bad, it is the community. Star Battle was a new idea, I like it, cause it blends competition with the ability to pay a lot of games with a lot of variation. Zealot Frenzy brings nothing to the table, while "Rodriguo's" map brings a whole new concept, and its an incredibly interesting one, I'm glad its on the list. Then, there's maps like Desert Strike, Nexus Wars, mindless games that drew people in for some reason. These maps suck, and they do not admit it. I do not understand these maps, I don't care if you made a spawner in the data editor, I don't care that you made everything in the data editor, I am a data editor myself and I have to say, it can't be more difficult than creating three whole new races from scratch. I'll say that outright. But, in the end, you must understand that the Customs list is flawed, and, speaking generally , to not want it changed is selfish to the mapmaking community as a whole. Personally to you, I hope you want the popularity list changed as well, because if you don't you have nothing to say here.
spoken like a true fucking hypocrite , first you go an "Omit Sotis" , but you cannot defend why you have done this, then you say my map for instance brings nothing new to the table for footmen frenzy which is a complete lie, Yet the very reasons you say on why my map should not be omited exist in SOTIS, its the same terrain as dota from war3, its the same merc spots for jungling, its the same good vs evil, Its the same item build up system,its the same 3 types of heroes, farmers/gankers/supporters. Yet apparently it gets "omited'
while maps like mine do the very same thing to keep the core elements into the game, yet Sotis is Omited? fucking hypocrite.
I have changed the entire way of how heroes heal in my map compared to footmen frenzy on war3 (of which i was part of the team that brought the orginal footmen frenzy from Hato Up and Nohunters which is a blizzard featured map for warcraft3 ), i am still from nohunters and zealot frenzy has all the memebers remaining from nohunters footmen.
i have added Cliff play mechanics (not seen on war3 footies), Every hero i have brought is new and different. I have every single mercenary different, i have almost all the items different , i have chronoboost for your spawns , i have changed the entire upgrade system for units to be an individual based one.
Go ahead and hate on me that i stuck to some of the elements that made footmen frenzy what it is , you sound pretty pathetic to be honest with your arguments to come and tell me i havent innovated frenzy, a last ditch effort maybe ? i have argueable innovated frenzy way more than SOtiS has innovated dota, as the only innovation i have seen does not change to core gameplay at all in SOTIS, the recipe system is the only part thats better than the war3 system.
For ZF when you have the entire healing system for heroes different which now allows "on the go healing", and chrono boost for spawns with cliff play that is GAME changing and makes it a drasctically different game
So continue to be a hypocritical please. Haters will always be haters.
I'm sure you can still get your point out without the "fking" before every hypocrite :S but i'm still kinda on the neutral bar for the popularity system because i like the fact of having the map on your own computer in a map folder which you can then host as well as others and give it a specific game name to exclude newcomers or welcome newcomers which sc2 doesn't allow us to do.
I think the problem is u can't push a map now.
Old SC2 system:
Say u have an amazing 12 player map. U just start a game for 5min realtime, and redo it over and over. After 10 hours u have 100 games. If your map was good, it will stay there until next reset.
Buged SC2 system:
the reset limit was 18 hours. Just play 3 time with 12 players for 30min and u need to push it again. There is no sense to push it, but your map will still be played. Unknown map has more chance to be known.
New SC2 system:
No possibility to push a game. U have to make a game that is good for any numbers of players.
The single player part is for the beginning, for explorers. The multiplayer part will prevent that game being boring again.
@avogatro: Go
so bugged was better since it gave all maps same chance to be played
@Maknyuzz: Go
You seem to equate unique with hard to learn. A lot of people equate complexity with hard to learn, but this one is even worse. Hard to learn is its own thing.
BNET players are perfectly happy to try unique takes on a genre, and even reward these maps. I'd say Star Battle is quite a bit different than your typical AoS. BNET players are not willing to stick with games that are hard to learn though.
If players get confused and leave, that is the map's fault. Clearly it wasn't an isolated incident. You need to take some blame here for creating a hard to learn map. Know your audience.
I intend to release (not imminently) a very unique and extremely complex map relative to the genre. But, it will be easy to learn. Let's see how it fares.
Creating a map that is easy to learn while adding elements unique to the genre can be difficult. Karawasa is correct in that it is your fault if players do not learn the map quickly enough, but you shouldn't give up because of it. Just try different ways of introducing the gameplay to the player.
In my TD, players can build bunkers in addition to towers. Players must put units in the bunkers for them to attack. However, players would not pay attention to the description, and build units without bunkers. They'd complain that they don't work.
I attempted to solve this by making units require at least one constructed bunker before they can be trained. This solved the unit problem. But it opened a new one.
Now, players will mass bunkers without units because they are the cheapest tower. It is very difficult to explain the simplest concepts to new players in one game. You have to put instructional text in exactly the right places at exactly the right time. If you put too much information in one spot, most of it will be ignored. If you present too much information at one time, most of it will be ignored.
lol now thats funny i read what you said and i gotta say your funny :D
I would like to dispute the graph on grounds of subjectivity; I think SotIS is extremely good (and it's on the first page), as well as Desert Strike (and possibly Bunker Wars). :)
Of course, but their general polish and gameplay aren't bad, its their lack of originality, game-play simplicity, and ease of making(imagine a gold division player in tournaments and versing high level players(master league) and succeeding, you'll understand why many mapmakers dislike these maps.) Most mapmakers view these maps as EZ-mode, and feel that their harder work should be given a chance, yet it is not. Now the reason a lot of the maps on the front page are on the front page is their competitiveness. I wish this wasn't true, but the fact that a majority of the community is a group of very competitive kids and young adults means that maps do not get their fair share when lacking "competition".
Finally, the mapmakers hate the maps on the front page for this very reason. Mapmakers are not competitive, some are very smart, but many are not competitive. They do better in games that don't require natural ethletic (yes I meant ethletic) ability. These "ethletes" are very picky about the maps they like, and currently, these are the maps on the front page. Now, the creator of Zealot Frenzy got very defensive earlier, because his map was on the front page. To be frank, I have played all the maps on the front page, and many of them have polish or lack originality, or lack polish and have competition. But to be frank, they all are mostly tug, aos, or mass games, and they do not deviate. However much physical work was put into them, MINIMAL thought was put into them. I put a lot of thought into my maps, I know rodrigo puts thought into his, and I know a lot of mappers think for HOURS to come up with the kind of maps they make. YES, I said HOURS, we are hard thinkers, and when a mapmaker with minimal skill and minimal thought makes a map that isn't amazing but "mediocre" so to speak, and it becomes part of the front page where other maps are more deserving. That just speaks how one sided the community is. They want very few things from customs, and those that want more, they've created niches in lotr, smashcraft, and debates.
This is where I stop, I feel very passionate about this issue, and I think we have to be more vocal. We should take the chance, and I think we should all submit customer service forms stating explicitly to change the format of the customs map system to how it was when it was bugged. And we should send one form each every two weeks, to keep reminding blizzard, please join me, for we are all injured. We need to scream it everywhere, chat channels, forums, everywhere. Its one for all and all for one here, and its time we went on the mapmaking crusade.
the way i see it is like this, its really easy to pass judgement on stuff you simply do not understand what your talking about, If map makers see some of the first page maps as easy mode, Then go ahead and create them.
Im pretty sure guys such as yourself, would watch my map and be like, This map is EZ mode. Well guess what, Everybody complains about the data editor taking heaps amount of time, Zealot frenzy for instance doesnt take much triggers, HArdly any as a matter of fact, bascailly all u you need is some win /loose /set team triggers and your done, but for the data editor work? think again, this map requires SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTLOADSSSSSSSSS of data editor work. The stuff that makes map makers here tear their hair out it takes so long.
But guess what, Triggers alone dont define how much EFFORT it takes to making any of the so called "ez mode" maps.
If you look at the common theme of all the first page maps, they are all Extremely heavy in data editor work .
I see guys like rodriguo put togeter maps in just a mere 2-3 months , and claim them to be Great amazing deserving maps that clearly wont be in his biased poll of "average maps"
If anybody here took the slightest amount of effort to see what it takes to create such a map as mine, you will Scream in tears at the amount of work. I started ZF since BETA, and i have the youtube video post date to prove it : date posted june 13th
7 months of HARD work , and im still making it up to this day, When maps like Nexas word wars or debates are basically "DONE", Completed, nothing substantial to be added again.
If you look, every map at first page, is a continous never stopping work in delevopement, all the players know that new versions will just keep being pumped out that change the games themselfs drastically and keep things fresh. (and by drastically i mean additions of new Heroes, or new items, or new tech choices, or units or whatever, theres no limit to how much features you can add is the point im making)
So please, before saying certain maps are Ez mode, Actually play them first and try to understand how much effort it actually takes. Ive spent many a day bascially from as i wake up to as i go to sleep mapping ZF, to then hear douchebags like rodrigue just dismiss maps as "average" or "aweful" in a very public poll when rodriguo has nothing to show for it .
You go try making ZF ,
-create 3 custom spells that level up to "6" YES 6 levels in this god forsaken editor, with 3 levels of ultimates also, and have 20+ heroes in the game with all unique abilties following this rule per hero., and make numerous mercs with specially made custom abilties , Go make 50+ upgrades for your units Each indivdually, and 40+ items that arent all just "stat buffers" , then make 5 tiers with 5 units each, and make a unique racial upgrade for each teched unit with its own requirements,
Do level skip requirements for each hero at level 1/4/7/10/13/16 for standard abilties, and 6/11/16 for ultimates and then come back to me and tell me thats an "ez" map to make..
Some guys here ( not all) simply have no clue what it takes.
@LaertesSC2: Go
Don't clump SOTIS into that grouping. I've been working on my RPG's heros for months. What ekcol has done is amazing and he's way ahead of the game.
Did I claim that? Sorry if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I never said that.
@Jinxxx123: Go
The thing is, how much work you put into it is really irrelevant. What counts is the final product. There is obviously a correlation between these two, but it is not cause and effect. Your thinking is from the perspective of one guy making the map. If you had a team and did it in a month, would it be any less of a map?
This is the reason why they stay there, not why they are there in the first place. Nevertheless, I couldn't agree more on the importance of this.
But maps don't stay at the top forever, plenty of maps have risen to the first page then after a couple of weeks go down. Maybe its not as changing as you like but the fact is people find a map they like then they play it constantly for a while.
The maps which stay at the top for what seems like forever manage that because they have larger communities or are very competitive like SOTIS or marine arena.
Also its clearly not true that the maps on the first page have had no effort put in and could be based out in a couple of hours. Other than that occasional new map that for some reason shoots to the number 1 spot and is a broken mess of course ^^
My map is now officially on the first page. Suck it, bitches!
Just kidding, sort of.
Your map does not add anything new to the table, it does not expand on frenzy, it is just like footman frenzy, with zealots. I will omit SOTIS, it is not the map which is bad, it is the community. Star Battle was a new idea, I like it, cause it blends competition with the ability to pay a lot of games with a lot of variation. Zealot Frenzy brings nothing to the table, while "Rodriguo's" map brings a whole new concept, and its an incredibly interesting one, I'm glad its on the list. Then, there's maps like Desert Strike, Nexus Wars, mindless games that drew people in for some reason. These maps suck, and they do not admit it. I do not understand these maps, I don't care if you made a spawner in the data editor, I don't care that you made everything in the data editor, I am a data editor myself and I have to say, it can't be more difficult than creating three whole new races from scratch. I'll say that outright. But, in the end, you must understand that the Customs list is flawed, and, speaking generally , to not want it changed is selfish to the mapmaking community as a whole. Personally to you, I hope you want the popularity list changed as well, because if you don't you have nothing to say here.
ROFL, another footy to support the 3 exiciting footys in 1st page on EU. YES PLS
I FUCKING WANT FOOTY I DONT WANT ANYTHING ELSE, PLS RENAME STARCRAFT 2 TO FOOTMEN WARS, SINCE THAT IS ALL THE BULLSHIT YOU CAN PLAY.
in before expansion: heart of the footmen wars
spoken like a true fucking hypocrite , first you go an "Omit Sotis" , but you cannot defend why you have done this, then you say my map for instance brings nothing new to the table for footmen frenzy which is a complete lie, Yet the very reasons you say on why my map should not be omited exist in SOTIS, its the same terrain as dota from war3, its the same merc spots for jungling, its the same good vs evil, Its the same item build up system,its the same 3 types of heroes, farmers/gankers/supporters. Yet apparently it gets "omited'
while maps like mine do the very same thing to keep the core elements into the game, yet Sotis is Omited? fucking hypocrite.
I have changed the entire way of how heroes heal in my map compared to footmen frenzy on war3 (of which i was part of the team that brought the orginal footmen frenzy from Hato Up and Nohunters which is a blizzard featured map for warcraft3 ), i am still from nohunters and zealot frenzy has all the memebers remaining from nohunters footmen.
i have added Cliff play mechanics (not seen on war3 footies), Every hero i have brought is new and different. I have every single mercenary different, i have almost all the items different , i have chronoboost for your spawns , i have changed the entire upgrade system for units to be an individual based one.
Go ahead and hate on me that i stuck to some of the elements that made footmen frenzy what it is , you sound pretty pathetic to be honest with your arguments to come and tell me i havent innovated frenzy, a last ditch effort maybe ? i have argueable innovated frenzy way more than SOtiS has innovated dota, as the only innovation i have seen does not change to core gameplay at all in SOTIS, the recipe system is the only part thats better than the war3 system.
For ZF when you have the entire healing system for heroes different which now allows "on the go healing", and chrono boost for spawns with cliff play that is GAME changing and makes it a drasctically different game
So continue to be a hypocritical please. Haters will always be haters.
I'm sure you can still get your point out without the "fking" before every hypocrite :S but i'm still kinda on the neutral bar for the popularity system because i like the fact of having the map on your own computer in a map folder which you can then host as well as others and give it a specific game name to exclude newcomers or welcome newcomers which sc2 doesn't allow us to do.
Ye, I guess before you all tumble into another flame war, I'll cool all your little egos down, by throwing my superior ego on top.
In other words: This is now very locked.