Let's Improve: Custom Game Interface Categories

[Twilice]

I think what he means by "risk maps" is like the board game RISK. I suggest renaming that section "Board Games" so as to include lots of games like Chess, Monopoly, Sorry, Chutes and Ladders, Candyland, etc. You could possibly further expand it by calling it "Turn-Based Games". Sheep Tag could possibly fall under the Capture the Flag category, as they both seem to deal with obtaining a specific object/goal that resides in a specific location on the map. I'm not sure though. I am unfamiliar with anything named "sheep tag". As for LOTR, WW sim, conquest maps, I have no clue. It all depends on if it is turn-based or real-time.

Anyway, even if they don't fall under those categories, "turn-based" needs to be a category.

You need to play more wc3, even though it seems to be the case for sheep tag and specially risk. risk maps or not turn based afaik. (but they do need a better name then "risk" because the map is usually about controlling territories like risk and that you get income from them. Then you usually send units in real time, it wouldn't work turn based.....)
And sheep tag and tropical tag I don't think they can be called capture the flag really (maybe) but it's more like police and thieves. Some chase and some run, those who run are supposed to turtle as long as possible until they are strong enough to kill the über powered chasers. (usually those who get tagged also turn into "evil" minions to chase the others).

Also we need a footmen category (idk what they are supposed to be called...)
Also we need some name for "enfo kind of maps" for those who has played wc3 know what I mean, but idk what they should be called.

Those aren't exactly clear names though..... I'll see if I can came upp with something better and new.

[flak4321]

Here's a suggestion I do not see yet that comes from castle sims: Siege. You could think of it as a form of inverted tower defense, with the option of having a COM tower or humans on both sides. If this is covered in TD, then i apologize for some redundancy. Also note this would overlap with other types such as Capture the flag or King of the Mountain. Actually KoM could be its own type where a player has to hold the center/flag for a set amount of time.

[Twilice]

Hm, it's like that other fun map, castle siege. No I do not find that equall to a td or a tw (tower defence and tower wars)

[Gifted]

Would those fit under "base defense" still? No matter what side you are? The mentality of it is the same. Thoughts?

[Twilice]

I think it would be confusing, imo it's quite different from attacking a base and defending one. (it's saying getting tanks and bunkers with some turrets to "dig in" is the same as getting lots of reapers or medivac drops to harras)

I think Castle Siege maps are more like tower wars. I my oppinion it should be a different category. I don't know how blizzard wants with the categories but I say it's better to add one to many then one to few. And then filter out the unneeded if there is any.

[flak4321]

Would those fit under "base defense" still? No matter what side you are? The mentality of it is the same. Thoughts?

The mentalities overlap without question, and you could call siege a form of base/tower defense, but the primary goals of maintaining offense or defense differ. They fall in between a standard melee mindset and a straight tower defense. In a siege, the player that starts as a defender doesn't get the same freedoms in strategy, particularly in expansion and aggressiveness. The attacker/sieger starts with map control and can expand freely, thus promoting/allowing an overtly aggressive stance/mentality to the attacker/sieger. The defender is restricted to intense resource management. Twilice's comment has an excellent example in the first paragraph.

@Gifted and Twilice: Siege maps need not start both players with a "tower." It could, but this is not a requirement. Example: the Siege mode of the game Stronghold 2. If you choose to be the attacker/sieger, you start with a preordained attack force, with some automated reinforcements depending on how the level is programmed. You usually, in this example, do not get the ability to amass any resources to self reinforce. In those rare maps where this is allowed, you have free reign over all resources not within the castle walls or within bow/siege machine range.

In the same game, to illustrate the mentality differences, you can choose to be the defender. Here's the hitch: you can build buildings and forces to sustain your D, again pending creator choice on the matter. You are restricted to the starting space within your walls and what resources are enclosed therein. Those maps of this type that are based on real castles contain all the entry/exit features of said castle, adding a further limitation on grabbing extra reources.

A difficulty in porting this to SC2 would be defining/creating "walls" and limiting unit movement through them, specifically air and burrowed units.

In all honesty though, we could group siege with tower defense and offer it as a subcategory.

Edit: I kept saying Tower defense, but this holds for base defense also. Defense type games allow for defense only. Siege could be made more unique by allowing the offensive position only.

[Gifted]

I see some of the good conversation regarding seige games then. Thanks for your thoughts. I don't have time to do cleanup right now, but when I will, I will address each post and also update the main post to give us a clear focus on where we stand with this project.

[Alzarath]

Madness

Maps that have had masses of units attacking eachother in SC1 have usually been considered 'madness' maps. I think it's fitting and should be included.

[Gifted]

ok, I think this thread/task has been exhausted. What's interesting is that this turned out to help 2 different projects, not just one.

I will say this much, this information is going far. Thank you all and look forward to the next "Let's Improve" very soon.

(Normally I'd close it here, but I'm leaving it open in case anyone wants to make a final comment or two.)
(EDIT: Maul, directed at you, I'm sorry about the misunderstanding in the original post, you are correct, I was trying to build a list, not a discussion. You deserve an apology since the origin of the communication breakdown was my fault man. /apologyhammer)

[minerals]

I remember playing AoM as a kid and playing Final Fantasy on it. Would this be classified as a rpg?