The problem with this article by Artosis is simply the way it's written; there are some good points, but they get overlooked.I recommend more effort the next time you state your goal is to be objective. There are several areas where the language is poorly used and bias is transparent. You have to be careful how you word things or people will not listen.
As for discussion, it's really interesting how controversial DO is. Pros from every race seem to hate this map, but it has really produced some fantastic replays. If it's hard for everyone, doesn't that make it one of the more balanced maps?
While we're on the topic of bad maps, I'm just going to plug my own map, which I feel is pretty balanced. With all of the different map threads on the forums now it is so easy for maps to get overlooked.
The problem with this article by Artosis is simply the way it's written; there are some good points, but they get overlooked.I recommend more effort the next time you state your goal is to be objective. There are several areas where the language is poorly used and bias is transparent. You have to be careful how you word things or people will not listen.
As for discussion, it's really interesting how controversial DO is. Pros from every race seem to hate this map, but it has really produced some fantastic replays. If it's hard for everyone, doesn't that make it one of the more balanced maps?
This.. Most of the pro level games on DO is really epic.. Don't why its hard for the players but its really awesome for the spectators..
On June 20 2010 19:05 Strut wrote: As for discussion, it's really interesting how controversial DO is. Pros from every race seem to hate this map, but it has really produced some fantastic replays. If it's hard for everyone, doesn't that make it one of the more balanced maps?
I think many people hate the map only because you have to do something different from your normal game plan. Thats the only reason.
I also agree that this map is very good from a spectators point, simply because the players have to do something different.
I had to registrate to write something, because in my opinion everybody is missing a huge point here.
Perhaps, maybe or maybe not, some maps are imbalanced for high end pro-gaming, where only little tiny differences make a huge impact on succes or failure. But consider Blizzard, they are making these maps for millions of people, who have way less skills then progamers. The elite group is only ,01% of the total base of players, no way Blizzard will create maps soley for them. My point being, although some maps are not suited for progaming, they are very well suited for normal games, which Blizzard is mainly aiming for. As a lower lvl player, you don't want even more adjustments with chokes/rocks/or whatever just so it's more balanced. It takes away the fun for many. I think these maps are very well designed for normal players and changing (or even removing) them would ruin it for a normal player. I don't want maps which all look and feel the same, just because they are spot-on for balancing purposes at high lvl play. I want to have the feeling I'm playing on a deserted planet, where not everything is perfectly symmetrical and balanced.
I guess it will be up to the eSPORTS to come up with good maps for progaming, perhaps progaming only.
As for discussion, it's really interesting how controversial DO is. Pros from every race seem to hate this map, but it has really produced some fantastic replays. If it's hard for everyone, doesn't that make it one of the more balanced maps?
we have seen epic games in all the wcg tournaments. still the majority of the map pool (esp the older ones) was horrible.
On June 20 2010 19:18 Stuv wrote: I had to registrate to write something, because in my opinion everybody is missing a huge point here.
Perhaps, maybe or maybe not, some maps are imbalanced for high end pro-gaming, where only little tiny differences make a huge impact on succes or failure. But consider Blizzard, they are making these maps for millions of people, who have way less skills then progamers. The elite group is only ,01% of the total base of players, no way Blizzard will create maps soley for them. My point being, although some maps are not suited for progaming, they are very well suited for normal games, which Blizzard is mainly aiming for. As a lower lvl player, you don't want even more adjustments with chokes/rocks/or whatever just so it's more balanced. It takes away the fun for many. I think these maps are very well designed for normal players and changing (or even removing) them would ruin it for a normal player. I don't want maps which all look and feel the same, just because they are spot-on for balancing purposes at high lvl play. I want to have the feeling I'm playing on a deserted planet, where not everything is perfectly symmetrical and balanced.
I guess it will be up to the eSPORTS to come up with good maps for progaming, perhaps progaming only.
I agree, that the community must contribute with their own maps for the competetive scene. in the other hand iscussions and articles like this one are needed to build up enough knowledge to do that.
On June 20 2010 19:18 Stuv wrote: I had to registrate to write something, because in my opinion everybody is missing a huge point here.
Perhaps, maybe or maybe not, some maps are imbalanced for high end pro-gaming, where only little tiny differences make a huge impact on succes or failure. But consider Blizzard, they are making these maps for millions of people, who have way less skills then progamers. The elite group is only ,01% of the total base of players, no way Blizzard will create maps soley for them. My point being, although some maps are not suited for progaming, they are very well suited for normal games, which Blizzard is mainly aiming for. As a lower lvl player, you don't want even more adjustments with chokes/rocks/or whatever just so it's more balanced. It takes away the fun for many. I think these maps are very well designed for normal players and changing (or even removing) them would ruin it for a normal player. I don't want maps which all look and feel the same, just because they are spot-on for balancing purposes at high lvl play. I want to have the feeling I'm playing on a deserted planet, where not everything is perfectly symmetrical and balanced.
I guess it will be up to the eSPORTS to come up with good maps for progaming, perhaps progaming only.
Uh. No one is saying that all maps need to be exactly the same, but they do need to be balanced. The casual gamer isn't going to be bothered either way since your are correct in assessing that it is completely beyond him. But it does matter to the people who are trying to be the best - and simple modifications on these maps can lead to drastically better balance without sacrificing unique play. The maps that can't be saved can be removed (and all maps should be rotated healthily) and new interesting maps put in their place. It's a win win situation.
Just to emphasise my point. I have shitloads of fun playing on Fighting Spirit or Python in brood war. Both of which are progaming maps created by the progaming map design teams. Casual players love and enjoy these maps (and they are pretty balanced... generally speaking) just as the progamers do. Creating a balanced map isn't mutually exclusive from creating a map that the average gamer can enjoy as well.
I really enjoy the unique feel of desert oasis as all races even if it's not the most balanced. I feel a lot of players are making the assumption that natural expansions should always be easy to take just because they are on BW pro maps. SC2 strategy has not been developed anywhere near far enough to jump to that conclusion. It's good to have a couple of maps that favour 1 basing in the pool, people can just not play on them if they don't like them.
Think we can all agree that Incineration Zone was terrible, though.
On June 20 2010 19:18 Stuv wrote: I had to registrate to write something, because in my opinion everybody is missing a huge point here.
Perhaps, maybe or maybe not, some maps are imbalanced for high end pro-gaming, where only little tiny differences make a huge impact on succes or failure. But consider Blizzard, they are making these maps for millions of people, who have way less skills then progamers. The elite group is only ,01% of the total base of players, no way Blizzard will create maps soley for them. My point being, although some maps are not suited for progaming, they are very well suited for normal games, which Blizzard is mainly aiming for. As a lower lvl player, you don't want even more adjustments with chokes/rocks/or whatever just so it's more balanced. It takes away the fun for many. I think these maps are very well designed for normal players and changing (or even removing) them would ruin it for a normal player. I don't want maps which all look and feel the same, just because they are spot-on for balancing purposes at high lvl play. I want to have the feeling I'm playing on a deserted planet, where not everything is perfectly symmetrical and balanced.
I guess it will be up to the eSPORTS to come up with good maps for progaming, perhaps progaming only.
On June 20 2010 18:33 MaD.pYrO wrote: On the point of Kulas Ravine being very cramped, i think that's a very common trend in the map circulation, but Blizzard probably won't change those maps, like ever. (Just look at wc3 ladder maps).
They have to have a good map circulation. That's what makes sc1 bw so badass!
The problem with this article by Artosis is simply the way it's written; there are some good points, but they get overlooked.I recommend more effort the next time you state your goal is to be objective. There are several areas where the language is poorly used and bias is transparent. You have to be careful how you word things or people will not listen.
As for discussion, it's really interesting how controversial DO is. Pros from every race seem to hate this map, but it has really produced some fantastic replays. If it's hard for everyone, doesn't that make it one of the more balanced maps?
This.. Most of the pro level games on DO is really epic.. Don't why its hard for the players but its really awesome for the spectators..
Zergs hate it because there's a lot of cheese possible. Terrans and Protoss hate it because if you don't cheese, you lose.
I still think it's one of the best maps in the map pool - it just needs to be tweaked.
On June 20 2010 18:33 MaD.pYrO wrote: On the point of Kulas Ravine being very cramped, i think that's a very common trend in the map circulation, but Blizzard probably won't change those maps, like ever. (Just look at wc3 ladder maps).
They have to have a good map circulation. That's what makes sc1 bw so badass!
lets just hope the popular melee maps will be integrated into ladder system works
On June 20 2010 10:54 HowardRoark wrote: The problem is that Blizzard have started to listen too much to the community, and it has resulted in them going overboard more than once with the patching.
I do know that this particular post is about the maps ONLY, but Blizzard, if you read this, just bide your time and see how things play out before you do any more changes. You (Blizzard) have really gone overboard too many times already (phoenix anyone?) with the patch changes. Imagine if there were these uproars during the release of SC1; the game would not have been nearly as good if they kept tweaking as much as they do now before being patient and seeing how things play out.
On a side note, if someone can enlighten me, I do have one question: People kept talking about how useless mech were, but then it kept changing. I wonder: Was it the "Center Splash Damage" patch that totally turned the table for mech, or has it been viable to some extent all the way through beta, but that no one actually knew anyting?
For TvZ, mech was always good - I used it since one of the earliest patches. However, roaches used to be RIDICULOUS - they have since gone from 1 supply with super-super-super fast regen @ hive-tech, to 2 supply and way less regen unless burrowed.
what? mech was utterly horrible vs 1 supply roaches and 50 mana mind control
Yes I should have elaborated, semi-mech then. Pure mech sucked, agreed. Marauder/Thor was good for a while (before MC had 9 range, however.
But that's exactly why I mentioned roaches were ridiculous - mech would have been fine if it wasn't for that. Oh that and the fact that thors didn't do splash so mass mutas raped :D
I still think it's one of the best maps in the map pool - it just needs to be tweaked.
How would you tweak it, Jinro?
By people getting used to it - and other "totally different" maps - and having different strategies for them. This however needs TIME and WILLINGNESS TO ADAPT. The first we didnt have yet and the second is something our Korean Zergy friends (and many other Oasis- and Ravine-haters) apparently do not possess.
I think there is a saying flying around this forum that there is no broken unit, you just need to learn how to beat it. The same thing could be said for maps. While a map might be ugly or uninspiring to play on, that is a personal preference and I guarantee you that there are Zerg players out there who have nothing against Desert Oasis or Kulas Ravine. It is just our "Korean pro gamers" who are in love with their mechanics and who like to do the same things every time, who have trouble being creative on such a map.
EPT
