Discussion of terrain theory
I believe the terrainer has to make a choice, follow the concept and ignore the blocks?
After reading this post by AllStarEllis, I started to think long and hard about my terrain philosophy. I made a list of things that characterize my works and tried to sort them into a system of categorisation. I've listed what I came up with after a brief brainstorming section, and I'm curious about how all the terrainers out there would answer the following questions. Of course, these are just there to help you organise your thoughts, so don't feel obligated to answer them all. I'd also like to see other things that people have strong opinions about that are not included in my list.
Tilesets Which tilesets do you like best?
Installation for me. It has a clean, sleek look and is probably the only tileset that does interior space convincingly. You can really get a good ambience in installation, and that's the most important thing to me.
Do you have opinions about the different tilesets?
Jungle is the best for flexing your creative muscles, but I'm not a huge fan of it. The broodwar tilesets are drawn with more detail, and, unfortunately, that makes blending more of a chore. It can be done, but I don't bother with them. I really liked ashworld at one point, but outside of the glowing lava effects, it's really plain and limiting.
Blockiness How much does blockiness bother you?
A lot! I can't stand blockiness!
How much is too much?
If I can notice it, it's too much.
If blockiness cannot be avoided to achieve your vision, what do you do?
I either cover it with sprites or I give up. I usually reason that I can find an unblocky idea to replace it with.
Sprites How much do you use sprites in your work?
In my actual projects, I use quite a few sprites, but mostly for decorative purpose, and I try not to go overboard. I've cut down a lot since my Deep Blue days, but I still like using things like vespene orb sprites to fill empty space. I have spent enough time working with sprites that I have a pretty good understanding of how to use them.
How do you feel about others using sprites?
I'm generally OK with it, but I get annoyed when I see over-the-top sprite usage or when people use crashing sprites without knowing any better. There's a right and a wrong way to use sprites, and I think people really need to learn more about how sprites work (e.g. how they overlap) before using them.
What do you think are acceptable ways of using sprites (e.g. covering blockiness, decoration, none)?
I think it's fine to cover blockiness with sprites as long as it's not TOTALLY obvious. If you're going to do this, make sure to put down sprites that aren't covering blockiness as well so that it's somewhat consistent. That's how I roll.
Do you distinguish between using sprites and using units for decorative purposes?
No, I use them both for the same purposes. In fact, I probably use more units than I do sprites when I'm sprucing up a scene.
Doodads How do you think they should be used?
OK, doodads are almost a necessity in RPG maps, so I would definitely say they need to be used. They should be used to accentuate the terrain, but I think they shouldn't become the entire focus of a piece.
Are you one who uses them a lot or very little?
I like to think that I use them moderately. There are people who try to cover every open space with doodads, and I'm not one of them. In fact, I find that to be tacky and artificial. I don't buy the argument that in nature there is something everywhere because, while true, you can't see all the details when you're far away -- like we are in SC.
Do you use custom doodads?
I use custom ramps, but that's about it. I'm too lazy to make custom doodads, and I think the existing ones are plenty. Plus, the only people who would really notice are other mappers. In my experience, most people just don't care.
Functionality Is it more important that a piece be functional or aesthetically pleasing? Think maps with "square" terrain.
I have tried making maps using plain squares, and I just couldn't stand it. It's useful for board games and stuff, but I just find it so visually jarring. In my last map, I remade a console that I had once done entirely with rectangular tiles into an isometrical piece, and it looked so much better! I guess the point is -- OBVIOUSLY it's best to be both functional AND pretty, but, if I had to lean more to one side, I would take aesthetics.
Do you create works that have no function but to add flavour to your map?
Most definitely. I add doodads to places that people will never see just to amuse myself. The same goes for place that people do see. I'm almost obsessive about little trivial details.
Do you sacrifice functionality for looks?
I have done this on occasion, but not as much as one might think. There's a third element here called Time, and if you're willing to spend more of that, there's no reason you can't have both function AND looks.
Copying How often do you use custom blends that other people created?
Practically never. It helps that people make a lot of custom doodads -- something that I don't care about at all. Plus, my personal style doesn't really mesh with other peoples', so I end up having to do most of my work myself. Take for example my use of dirt->dirt half cliffs. Most people just stack full cliffs to get layers, but I personally hate that look.
Do you take small pieces or whole chunks?
Occasionally, I'll see that someone has found a better way to blend something, and I'll use it myself. It's usually a difference of one or two tiles, so I don't think it's that bad. I absolutely refuse to take big pieces of other peoples' work. Copying an entire room would be like plagiarising a paragraph from a term paper, IMO.
Do you find copying terrain to be an acceptable practice?
It's fine with me most of the time, but if I'm particularly proud of a certain blend, it can be a little sad to see someone just taking it. I don't get mad or anything, so it's all good.
Misc. Do you strive to create things that are outside the box, or do you try to get the most out of what is "inside" the box?
I really believe that SC tiles are limited in what they can do, but it doesn't mean that you can't strive to innovate or create cool things with the tools you have. I never try to make anything mindblowing, but I don't feel like that's a necessity since you can make good stuff without trying to.
Do try to maintain isometry when you terrain?
Isometry is really important to me. The game was made with an isometrical perspective, so I feel like isometry is best suited for making terrain. It's a personal thing, but I try to always abide by the rules of isometry whenever possible. This also means that I really hate perspective issues that relate to elevation, and I try really hard to work around them.
Are your creations generally sprawling landscapes or focused and isolated?
I happen to prefer making small, tightly confined areas. I think it's cool that people can design large landscapes, but I have a hard time with it.
Feel free to come up with your own ideas for discussion and let me how you feel about terraining in general.
None.
I try to always ask the authors if I can use their blends before using them, though.
I often end up doing symmetric works and I hate it 
. I find that the tiles are the easiest to blend 
