Talk:Maps

Would it be beneficial to include the info gathered from the SC2 Maps Analyzer? --Strutswell 02:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

For examples of what the analyzer can produce see this and this

there is only 1 post on this thread suggesting we should tabulate this info on the ladder maps to help everyone, but I wonder if this is against the terms of use for either Blizzard or the author of the sc2 analyzer.

I don't see any reason why not to do this, though I don't see a use for a lot of those statistics. Openness is fairly intuitive, why would you analyse that it's more open in the open and less open next to natural barriers? The only interesting thing for me would be travel distances at the moment. --Aesop 13:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

True, not much of that info is really useful for most players except the travel distance. The openness is good if you want to avoid an engagement in a choke point (or try to force an engagement) and there might be some merit to showing how many resources are actually contained in each expansion. I suppose it just seemed like the wiki is a good place for general info and stats, but you're right it might not provide much value... --Strutswell 08:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, the pictures should link to the map description page, not to the map jpg page. If you really want the jpg page, it is accessible from the description page. If I don't see any objection to this over the next several days, I'll go ahead and make the change. - Artie 5:37, 13 November 2010

I think that's totally reasonable. --Aesop 22:55, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

With the map changes as of yesterday to the North American server it brings up a few questions. Are the map pools on all servers the same, or eventually the same (updated within a few days of each other maybe)? If not would it be beneficial to the community to have a separate 'Map Pool' section for each server? For convenience sake would it be helpful to have ALL melee maps, currently available from blizzard, already with a page?

-not really sure if i did this correctly, please correct me if I did not. also, could someone link me to the timestamp thing that was displayed? --CitizenDread 26 Feb 2011

Currently Used Competitive Maps

The "Currently Used Competitive Maps" section either needs to include more detail (such as which tournaments are using the map(s)) or should be removed (IMO). -sureshot_

I think the first option sounds like the best, shouldn't be too hard to make a small list of tournaments the map is used in, one would think. --Salle 21:31, 20 May 2011 (KST)

I made a new section for maps which are not in competitive use and moved those there. The page still looks pretty cluttered and personally I would prefer a table without the images. --Noam 22:58, 20 May 2011 (KST)

Layout aesthetics

This page is getting pretty unwieldy and I think it would be a good idea to do some shifts in how it is laid out. Right now, it is split into just 'overview' and 'competitive', but maybe it could be broken down as such:

• Ladder - all current and past maps that are in the official battle.net ladder
• Currently used competitive maps - all maps used in the Premier Tournaments
• Past competitive maps - older maps that were once used in major tournaments, but are not anymore
• Other - I'm not sure about this one, but maps like Elysium and Agria Valley would go in here. It seems like it would primarily be official Blizzard maps that saw no usage at any time, anywhere, by anyone.

Visual77 07:19, 28 October 2011 (KST)

Monthly Maps

Can we remove the link to the monthly maps thing? I don't think they're doing it anymore --Drazak

If it's in the other sections at the bottom, there isn't a good reason to just remove them because it has become inactive. --blahz0r 03:12, 30 June 2012 (KST)