EPT[3:02:02 AM] [Fayth] Fauna quit crying
OH THE IRONY.
The BGH players , surprising - Page 2
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
YoUr_KiLLeR
United States3420 Posts
[3:02:02 AM] [Fayth] Fauna quit crying OH THE IRONY. | ||
|
iNsaNe-
Finland5201 Posts
| ||
|
roadrunner_sc
United States1220 Posts
I think it's the 1on1s that has the most problem. The ridiculously small chokes, the turtling that usually results. Worst of all, the MU's are ridiculously imbalanced. There's really no impact on economy whether you chose to expand or not, giving zerg players a huge advantage as it is. In terms of limitations, a typical TvT match on a BGH revolves essentially around 2 strategies. Either an early tank push, which, if failed, leads to a epic-mass-air-turtling-marcro-match garanteed to last anywhere from half an hour to several days. The entire concept of clever dropship usage is literally obsolete( Albait an occasional siege drop on behind the main, depending on your map). There's simply not enough room for efficient ground troop manuevering. All in all it's just a horrible concept for a map, good for newbies getting their hands warm, and garanteed to keep them at that level if they never move on. I feel sorry for those self proclaimed "gosus" on BGH. It's kinda like going into middle school and staying there for the rest of your life...Yea you'll be REALLY good at the same low level material....but who cares? | ||
|
KrAzYfoOL
Australia3037 Posts
| ||
|
YoUr_KiLLeR
United States3420 Posts
On May 27 2006 03:13 roadrunner_sc wrote:There's really no impact on economy whether you chose to expand or not, giving zerg players a huge advantage as it is. yes there is. you get more geysers. | ||
|
roadrunner_sc
United States1220 Posts
Right. It reduces, not take away, need for expansion. Depends on which BGH map also. I've usually seen anywhere from 2-4 on main. Usually 2 I guess. Good thing too. I can't imagine a z with enough gas late game to pump out 20 hatchery worth of ultras....every 50 seconds. | ||
|
geod
Vietnam450 Posts
On May 27 2006 03:29 KrAzYfoOL wrote: I think it depends what type of game you're playing on normal maps vs these BGH players, if you were to play a straight up macro game it would be much easier for them, but if you were to try something different and very strategical, i doubt they'd be able to react to it properly.. LOL Fayth got his ass raped in every game early 5,7 minutes. There is nothing of macro here dude. | ||
|
YoUr_KiLLeR
United States3420 Posts
On May 27 2006 03:54 roadrunner_sc wrote: Right. It reduces, not take away, need for expansion. Depends on which BGH map also. I've usually seen anywhere from 2-4 on main. Usually 2 I guess. Good thing too. I can't imagine a z with enough gas late game to pump out 20 hatchery worth of ultras....every 50 seconds. i meant you get more geysers from expanding so it does have an effect on your economy. lol? | ||
|
YoUr_KiLLeR
United States3420 Posts
On May 27 2006 02:29 iNsaNe- wrote: http://www.freewebs.com/o0oo/fayth.jpg AHAHAHAHAHA | ||
|
Mortality
United States4790 Posts
Fastest map = newbie shit. Whenever I play fastest (which is not often), I just storm drop their minerals. 1 storm = GG all resources. Fastest is a mindless, basic map which utilizes macro skills, no micro skills, and minimal strategy. BGH can actually be palyed at a decent level. I don't think most BGH players are decent, and I have little respect for the overall group of them, but they can actually be decent. Oh, and yes, hacks are more prevelant among money mappers. It's a sad reality. Ironically, hacks are also more prevalent in UMS than x17. Would you believe I got drop hacked for winning a UMS game? Seriously, what is the point? IT DOESN'T EVEN SHOW UP IN YOUR STATS. It just goes to show, you can't fix stupid. | ||
|
Mortality
United States4790 Posts
Yet, that's not to say that going from LT to BGH is a perfectly smooth transition. You have to relearn build orders and timing completely, and you have to unlearn many strategies that would be effective on limited resource maps (which is not so hard, but does take a bit of practice and fooling around). | ||
|
Arcanis
Croatia117 Posts
| ||
|
roadrunner_sc
United States1220 Posts
On May 27 2006 04:08 YoUr_KiLLeR wrote: i meant you get more geysers from expanding so it does have an effect on your economy. lol? That IS what I meant killer. The limitless mineral and gas count reduces your need to expand for both resources into a need to expand only for vespene and strategic reasons. So it's not completely unnecessary to expand but it certainly isn't nearly as important. I illustrated this fact to support that MUs are not balanced for a zerg. By late game he can own up to 20-40 hatcheries, about 10 or so in one place and rest all over the map. It's nearly impossible to kill a zerg ( assuming he doesn't completely suck) at this point since he can instantly counter any kind of forces you send. | ||
|
no.1
516 Posts
| ||
|
Sun
United States551 Posts
 BGH is totally different from low money maps agreed, but anyone who says BGH takes more skill than low money maps is a nut. | ||
|
aseq
Netherlands4019 Posts
On May 27 2006 04:30 Arcanis wrote: I think the original BGH was a standard low money map, but then the players made it the way it is now. A low money BGH on 3v3 is quite funny... especially on LAN ^^ First, Blizzard made the Starcraft map The Hunters, which is a standard map (1500 mins, 1 geyser) Players chose this map for it's simpleness and started adding resources. When BW was released, it included a map Big Game Hunters (which Blizzard made, by popular demand) which has 20k mins and 2 20k geysers). I don't know what the evolution of bgh has been like after that, the only bgh i play is versus one flatmate who can't play but likes to bgh vs me^^. | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
| ||
|
no.1
516 Posts
| ||
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
On May 27 2006 03:13 roadrunner_sc wrote: There's really no impact on economy whether you chose to expand or not, giving zerg players a huge advantage as it is. This was the point that was being debated, and now you are changing your words completely in order to agree with the other side | ||
|
[angst]chraej
1445 Posts
On May 26 2006 22:44 AK-Nemesis wrote: bgh is a good practice for macro and micro that's all. less use of terrain and more limits on strategies to employ, but nothing like what [angst]chraej said. nah, your wrong. *caugh i see a closet bgh player* (if you randomly join bnet and play a bgh map in this day and age you will be faced with no micro from you opponent, this is just a fact im sorry.) | ||
| ||
