화성 살아남기 2.6 B

Here's a thinking process:

1. Analyze the Request: - Role: StarCraft: Broodwar map reviewer - Input Data: Map data provided (title, filename, internal title, description, genre, players, etc.) - Output Rules: - Output must be JSON, Markdown, tables, lists, headings NOT allowed.

- First write Korean review: 900~1100 characters (including spaces) - Then a blank line, then - of the same content, no heading/subtitle - No "Korean Review", "StarCraft Broodwar Map Review", etc.

as headings - Output starts immediately with the review body text - Total output: 1800~3000 characters (including spaces) - Content should naturally cover: map structure, genre, gameplay style, player experience, recommended audience, pre-play check items - Do NOT invent maker, triggers, win conditions, story, balance adjustments - Do NOT list map size, resolution, tile units, encoding, and don't repeat the same explanation - Map Data Given: - Title: 화성 살아남기 2.6 B - Filename: 화성_살아남기_D2.8.scx - Internal title: 화성 살아남기 2.6 B - Internal description: 제작 : FunnyGuy 번역:fc- 번역 버젼:B(~Z)제작자의 이메일 : dFunnyGuyb@yahoo.com제작자-사이트 : www.FunnyGuy.go.ro - Genre: UMS (유즈맵) - Players: 6 - Teams: - - Expected play time: - - Difficulty: - - Version: - - Tags: - - Tileset: Volcano (화산)

2. Deconstruct the Output Requirements: - Korean review: 900-1100 chars (with spaces) - Then a blank line - Then - of the same content, no heading, also presumably around the same length? The rule says "overall output 1800-3000 chars", so Korean + English should total that. - No headings, no Markdown, no tables, no lists. Just plain text.

- Output starts immediately with the review body text.

- Total output: 1800~3000 characters (including spaces) - Content should naturally cover: map structure, genre, gameplay style, player experience, recommended audience, pre-play check items - Do NOT invent maker, triggers, win conditions, story, balance adjustments - Do NOT list map size, resolution, tile units, encoding, and don't repeat the same explanation - Wait, the prompt says: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라." Actually it says: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라." Wait, let me read carefully: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라." Actually the user prompt is: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라. 모든 문장을 한글로 작성하고 영문 문장을 출력하지 마라. 고유명사도 가능한 한 한글로 음역해라. 공백 포함 900~1,100자로 작성하며 제목, 머리말, 목록, Markdown, 부연 설명은 쓰지 마라. 원문에 없는 사실은 추가하지 마라."

Wait, the prompt actually starts with: "Here's a thinking process:" then gives a long prompt. The actual task is at the end: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라." But the "Here's a thinking process:" part contains all the rules. Let me re-read the entire user message carefully. User message structure: - "Here's a thinking process:" (this is likely the system prompt or framework) - Then a lot of text that seems to be the actual instructions/rules for the task. - The text includes: "아래 영문

를 바탕으로

본문만 새로 써라." Actually no, the text after "Here's a thinking process:" is the instruction. Let me parse it. Actually, the user message is: "Here's a thinking process:" followed by a block of text that defines the task