• Welcome to the Heroscapers 2.0 site! We've still got some dust to clear and adjustments to make, including launching a new front page, but we hope you enjoy the improvements to the site. Please post your feedback and any issues you encounter in this thread.

Wargrounds of Scape (WoS) - discussion thread

latest
 
I also think that just because a map isn't inducted into WoS, doesn't mean tournament organizers can't pick it in line with their own preferences or terrain limits. In planning I have looked through not just approved maps, but ones that were close to acceptance.

On a separate note I don't anticipate being answered for awhile, I wonder how the new Renegade terrain gets reflects in terrain requirements. Is the Battle Box an expansion os MS? Or do two of them define a MS? Would any map using the water expansion even be a credible inductee?
 
Yes, maps that don’t get inducted are often good or very good maps that deserve to continue to be played!

For the AoA stuff, we really don’t have to make any classifications, since we don’t have terrain limits for submission. I highly doubt that a water expansion map will ever make it, though.
 
I do not currently see any of the Renegade offerings as worthwhile to competitive maps. I am definitely against adding in random tiles from either of the new two sets (land and water) to existing sets, and I will likely downvote any map that does so.
 
At 0-2, No Aloha does not pass. I am sorry to have not gotten a review in on it, although I did play it a couple of times. I am unsure which way I would have ended up voting, as I liked my games in general but do definitely see the points raised by the other judges.

Alta is on the clock.
 
While I’m here, I’m going to drop a slightly conflicted :down: to induct on Pigeonhole.

If you look at Pigeonhole with any scrutiny for any length of time, you can tell the great care that went into most every aspect of the map, maximizing glyph distances, pairing up rock/sand where possible, massaging the start zone areas so there’s a clear line at the front.

And all that pays off to make Pigeonhole the best 1x BftU map I’ve played. But I still think it’s too small (135 hexes[!], ~30 smaller than existing small tournament maps) for a general recommendation, for a few reasons:
  • The difference between paths and perches is flattened
  • The three corridors of the map feel too narrow
  • If either army claims the height, it snowballs very quickly
Armies that rely on height advantage usually hate Pigeonhole, because there’s only one hex above level 2, and that means you get a lot of even ground shots, assuming your opponent is also able to get to level 2.

In the center, the map is 11 hexes wide, but it plays narrower than that, as LoS blockers and glyphs reduce that to 8 or 9. In fact, as the level 0 is almost only ever used to get an extra melee attack up onto level 2 (it is not really part of the map’s pathing), there’s about 6 hexes (three sets of two) available to use when crossing the map.

Once the center is controlled, that player has likely won the game, and there’s not much of a way to claw back a foothold against a strong central setup.

If you really need a 1x BftU map, you could do a lot worse than Pigeonhole, and I’m not sure you could do better. But if I ever got to give input on a physical map pool where Pigeonhole was one of the options, I’d strongly recommend reshuffling expansions to add another expansion or two to get yourself Odin Wept or Dance of the Dryads or even one of the many good non-WoS maps with a single dungeon and two expansion sets.

Like if your three maps were Yngvild Pass, Fire Isles OEAO, and Pigeonhole, you’re going to be better served by running Origin, Compact/Framework/Dry Season, and Odin Wept.Or Ice Thistle, Fire Isles, Origin…
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't have a ton to add to what superfrog said about Pidgeonhole. It's the best 1xBftU map I've ever seen, and if that's all the terrain you have to make a map, I would wholeheartedly recommend it. It stretches the terrain to the limit and I don't see any obvious ways to improve on the concept given the resources available.

I often say that I grade on a curve a bit by terrain used, and that I appreciate having lots of variety of terrain combinations in WoS. But I also think that inducting a map implies a certain level of map quality, and I'm not sure a 1xBftU map can meet that. So while I appreciate the design for sure, it's a :down: for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was expecting a Foudzing upvote on Pigeonhole but it never came :sad:. It is not inducted, at 0-2, and Flaxen Shard is back on the clock.
 
I would like to nominate my own Vixen to WoS.

img_0401_original.png


This map is actually my second attempt at this little-used set combo, after a short-lived poorly-received map called Krampus that has nearly been entirely erased from the internet. I created Vixen initially in October 2023 but revised it somewhat in March ahead of its use at Scape Summit (this was mainly to address some development concerns but also fixed some wonky SZ aesthetics).

Since then this map really has been a tournament staple, appearing in over 50 tournament matches across most of the major current scenes including MARS, Peoria, Utah, and SoCal (I did not choose it for any of those events). (All tournament usage linked here).

I think adding this set combo really gives WoS and TDs in general another helpful option. SotM has many good maps using road/castle, and more than a few using snow, but not many at all with lava (although another current nominee, Guts, does this as well). SotM/VW is an untenable (or at least uncomfortable) option, with no LoS blockers except the Hive between the sets. That makes the tundra set a natural addition, supplying the blockers that are sorely needed. And while Odin Wept is a fantastic map, this offers another master set option for those expansions in case your dungeon is needed elsewhere (and let’s be honest, it’s way easier to build :p )

I have enjoyed the somewhat challenging gameplay offered by this map, as most spots feel vulnerable in some way or another. But reception has seemed positive overall despite the challenges of playing on it, see a few thoughts from Scape Summit Attendees in the spoiler below:

Spoiler Alert!

Oh, and Maytrix says it’s one of his favorite maps ever :)
 
Pigeonhole:
Once again I was late, because to be fair I was not sure, it is a great map that offers many possibilities and choices considering the sets it uses, completely playable in tournaments and very fast paced obivously. Now options are still sightly limited, if the glyphs aren't very strong, the center takes all the attention, abit like in Song of the Walrus that has a very similar layout. I don't see this map deserving a WoS spot, no to induct.

Flaxxen Shard:
So in the first nomination I was about to post a yes vote when timer hit. I was happy it was re-nominated, so I think it is a very balanced map, and quite dynamic but it clearly pulls left. This left pull makes all the games playing a bit similar where the army with the range advantage will camp on left and the army with less range willl attack it directly or try to claim hill in the middle (the ruin really help to hide before claiming center hill btw a very cool feature).
In too many games I played a good half of the map was never touched.
So no balance problem or anything just sightly too repetitive to deserve a spot in the WoS in my opinion. No to indcut.

Vixen
While aestetics aren't super important for competitive, I think it's important for Heroscape to use maps that don't destroy your eyes, for example to attract new players or to attract a wider playerbase in tournaments.
This combo is just horrible pls do not try to make maps with this combo.
No to induct.
Edit: okay so this review let a sour taste in a lot of people mouth. While I find this map horribly looking, I must admit the gameplay is very good.
I was sure a huge majority of people would 100% agree with me on aestetics, but it looks like there is enough people who like this messy look this combo provides. So I'll hold on to my review for now, maybe get more games in to give it more chances, and maybe change my vote if gameplay continues to deliver, or just stay on an abstain vote.

Fire Isles
Once again a great map, all of the issues the original had have been solved, but I still can't help myself but think having the center sand being level 2, changes the dynamics of the map way too much compared to the original, and delete some of the spice and orginiality of this map (also going from molten to no molten saddens me).
That's a no to induct.

Stechavan:
By far the best map with those sets, better than Forest Fire by a landmile, super dynamic, action all over the map (line startzones often lead to that), great melee/range balance. Incentive for range to go forward and play the map.
MOLTEN LAVA, used with parcimony very well placed
10/10 map.
YES to induct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can we please add a rule to the OP that prevents judges from voting based on aesthetics alone? Sure, looks are important. But gameplay is what matters most of all, and I don't think it's right that a map with excellent gameplay could be downvoted by a judge purely because they don't like how the map looks. (Particularly since, unlike gameplay, aesthetics are 100% subjective). The flip side for this argument is also worth considering - should @OEAO have upvoted Sirocco to enter the WoS because he thinks it is "quite possibly the most beautiful map I've ever seen"?
 
Oh I think aesthetics are a very important factor. If a map is flat out ugly, I don't care how good the game play is, I won't have fun playing on it. Is game play more important, probably, but the aesthetic isn't a throw away.
 
Can we please add a rule to the OP that prevents judges from voting based on aesthetics alone? Sure, looks are important. But gameplay is what matters most of all, and I don't think it's right that a map with excellent gameplay could be downvoted by a judge purely because they don't like how the map looks. (Particularly since, unlike gameplay, aesthetics are 100% subjective). The flip side for this argument is also worth considering - should @OEAO have upvoted Sirocco to enter the WoS because he thinks it is "quite possibly the most beautiful map I've ever seen"?

Sure aestetics are way less important than gameplay but in my opinion WoS maps should have like a "quality floor" in all categories, including aestetics.
Like I'm not fan of the idea of showing someone "those are our best tournament maps ever" and having bunch of ugly maps in there.

I would've ditched off Sirocco real fast aswell cause even tho it's a beautiful map I find the gameplay to be really bad.

Now of course we can argue that aestetics is too subjective to be judged, but in my opinion gameplay is pretty subjective aswell (per proof the many many different opinions of judges on a lot of maps, see Fulcrum review for example).
The only quite objective criteria we can judge a map on is balance, and even then it's not that objective. And if we'd judge balance only a lot of my votes would have been different.

But yeah everything is quite subjective hance we have different judges with different weights in criterias and different tastes.

Now if this rule is stated, I'll gladly hold off to my review and review Vixen again.
 
Just to clarify, even tho my review does not show it, I did play Vixen a couple times and watched games on it and while the gameplay on it is quite good from what I saw (I would need more plays for a YES vote tho, even if the map didn't hurt eyes) it does not outweight the big lack in aestetics in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to clarify, even tho my review does not show it, I did play Vixen a couple times and watched games on it and while the gameplay on it is quite good from what I saw (I would need more plays for a YES vote tho, even if the map didn't hurt eyes) it does not outweight the big lack in aestetics in my opinion.

Okay so this review let a sour taste in a lot of people mouth. While I find this map horribly looking, I must admit the gameplay is very good.
I was sure a huge majority of people would 100% agree with me on aestetics, but it looks like there is enough people who like this messy look this combo provides. So I'll hold on to my review for now, maybe get more games in to give it more chances, and maybe change my vote if gameplay continues to deliver, or just stay on an abstain vote.
 
I wouldn't mind if aesthetics was the dominating factor in a downvote. Surely, it is possible to have a map so hideous that it would never pass, right? Even if the gameplay is good. I don't believe Vixen is that map by any means, but surely it is possible such a map could exist.
 
I'm nominating Shoots and Leaves by Gamebear

shootsandleaves1_917.jpg


https://www.heroscapers.com/community/downloads.php?do=file&id=5518

It's been used at 2 Mass monthlies and a Michigan monthly according to heroscape.org
https://heroscape.org/map/view/?HeroscapeMap=140

It's also been used at least once at a Midwest Melee and at least once at a Ken Con.

Everyone already knows that I'm a fan of GameBear's work. Responsible for some of the very best maps, no question.

We have enjoyed playing on Shoots and Leaves. I love the use of road, jungle, cover, and shadow to help units deploy into the game effectively (especially my melee units). Really sharp use of some of the very best elements in Scape.

This map tends to get hot and interesting quickly, with a lot of level 2 to spread out in and contest, and limited level 3. Some great play, no question.

However, I have found that the use of so much jungle and trees leads to many pinch points. There are several areas where a single well placed blocking unit can significantly hamper an army's ability to get units into needed positions. I recognize that this can be excellent and part of the best part of the game, but too often it felt like this game was built for rats to lock up the map, neutralizing the map's generally remarkable tendency to fun and effective unit deployment.

I love the table presence and so much about this map. I also feel like it can be abused and locked down by armies using blocking units. I hate to do it, but I vote NO to induct Shoots and Leaves.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not a question of a specific tree, but how close some of them are. The tree in the center of the 7-hex pieces (near the start zones), with the jungle bushes spread out down below, allow for one or two units to really jam up the side (and even standing on height). The center tree similarly makes it easy to get units on the ridge over the roads, making it hard to come through the middle. It's the groupings of a handful of trees within fairly close proximity and elevation changes there as well, that lead to some pinch points.

I want to be clear: this is a great map and most games are great fun, but an army with heavy blockers can take advantage and lock down corridors in a way that is quite rough on melee armies particularly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to nominate Dredgewood Forest and Frostmire for WoS's consideration. Both maps were played at Scapecon IV and have been played at numerous events before, and have proven to be strong competitive maps. They also both use set combinations that are already represented in the WoS, but do their combinations in distinctly different ways. They have been some of my favorite maps to play on recently and always provide excellent gameplay.

Dredgewood Forest

dredgewood%20forest_TN8.png


Spoiler Alert!


Frostmire

frostmire_v3_original.jpg


Spoiler Alert!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey WoS-ers! I'm sad to say that I'm going to step down from my role as WoS judge. I've very much enjoyed my time working with the project, but it's time.

I still enjoy looking at, playing, and evaluating new maps, but over the past while I've felt that it's the right time to step down as I no longer feel like the frog fit for the job. There are myriad reasons (as there always are), but mainly I just don't have the drive for the project and have begun to see it more as an obligation than an opportunity, which is always a good sign for me to step out of the way of those who do see it as an opportunity.

I was hoping to end with at least one, if not more, final reviews for maps before I stepped out, but I don't have any ready and don't want to force out less-than-quality reviews. Fortunately with the WoS structure that won't be a huge deal, but I am sorry to the judges anyway.

WoS is great! Let's keep these 'Scapers busy with more submissions!
 
Back
Top