|
blizzard maps are soo much better than most of the iccup crap that gets churned out. every single iccup map is the same. each starting base has an expo or two perfectly defendable by 1 easy choke/ramp. then add a little python or decal in the middle and bingo another sick map. seriously all iccup maps are macro-fuck-orientated and end up playing the same every game.
i think early in the beta many were complaining that blizzards sc2 maps were "made too well." ......................
i would like to see more maps like "desolation" and "breaking point" maps that actually were fun to play.
You do realize that iCCup does not make the SC1 maps right? That's KESPA.
Learn some more about SC before you some in here bashing iCCup.
You know why KESPA made maps like that?
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Maybe people hate desert oasis as PLAYERS, but honestly it is the best SPECTATOR map Blizzard has at the moment. By far the closest in feeling to a Brood War map, and has produced the most exciting games from top players.
Suck it up, the pro gamers have to.
|
I think a lot of the map balance problem is really a race balance problem that can be traced back to the lack of options and general blandness of zerg. When maps diverge from the default layout design, the relative balance of units, abilities, and strategies shift. Races with more units, abilities, and strategies are more likely to have one of their options shift to be very powerful in a particular map layout.
|
The map pool is shitty atm. Too many possible cliff abuses, or just small maps with proxy written all over it. WTB SC2 version of destination.
1 thing though. I cant even get how someone can say DO is not zerg favored. True, hellion harass is that much stronger on it, but any 1 base into muta play from the zerg completely negates it and sets you up for some pretty strong mid/late game play. Mech is horribly slow, zerg are horribly fast, and DO is the largest map: I dont get what better map you could wish for, seriously.IT IS my favorite map as a zerg. The only one with decent large open spaces and flank possibilities. I just cant wait until they make more maps as large as this one, while fixing some obvious imbalances like the large open natural.
ZvP doesnt even need to be discussed: artosis is right, anything other than early all ins pretty much sets up the toss for a serious rape. Z can litteraly go only lings all the way up to hive tech and not even worry about losing.
|
I miss bw maps ._. If there is one thing Blizzard can't do, it's making great maps..
Where are all the epic maps like Andromeda and Outsider?
And why oh why does almost every map have either rocks with only 2k hp going into the main OR an undefendable choke to the nat? Sigh... It's as if Blizzard only want to see cheese..
|
Yep, maps are a huge issue, they are garbage, i totally agree with you, except LT and Metalopolis. We really need new and good maps.
On June 19 2010 22:58 OneFierceZealot wrote:
"There's a COUPLE good ones. Metalopolis and Lost Temple come to mind. But yea Blizz historically sucks at making maps. I think the issue is they need to start acknowledging the awesome player made maps like Match Point."
blizzard maps are soo much better than most of the iccup crap that gets churned out. every single iccup map is the same. each starting base has an expo or two perfectly defendable by 1 easy choke/ramp. then add a little python or decal in the middle and bingo another sick map. seriously all iccup maps are macro-fuck-orientated and end up playing the same every game.
i think early in the beta many were complaining that blizzards sc2 maps were "made too well." ......................
i would like to see more maps like "desolation" and "breaking point" maps that actually were fun to play.
rofl on this...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 19 2010 22:58 OneFierceZealot wrote:
"There's a COUPLE good ones. Metalopolis and Lost Temple come to mind. But yea Blizz historically sucks at making maps. I think the issue is they need to start acknowledging the awesome player made maps like Match Point."
blizzard maps are soo much better than most of the iccup crap that gets churned out. every single iccup map is the same. each starting base has an expo or two perfectly defendable by 1 easy choke/ramp. then add a little python or decal in the middle and bingo another sick map. seriously all iccup maps are macro-fuck-orientated and end up playing the same every game.
i think early in the beta many were complaining that blizzards sc2 maps were "made too well." ......................
i would like to see more maps like "desolation" and "breaking point" maps that actually were fun to play.
Uhm, honestly, the SC1 pro maps are significantly better than the current set of Blizzard SC2 maps.
That isn't even a poor reflection on Blizzard - how the hell are you going to make a truly good map for a game that hasn't even entered beta (at the time the maps were made)?
They did a good job all things considered, but some of the maps are ridiculously imbalanced.
|
"Learn some more about SC before you come in here bashing iCCup." oh my bad... i forgot when i bought StarCraft on the back of the case it came with an instructions on KESPA and their role in the StarCraft universe. sorry just found it. its really interesting. btw i fixed your post + Show Spoiler +
|
While I have great respect for Artosis and Idra and their skills, this article really makes me want to follow MorroW's, reaction. The whole concept behind the article is completely irrelevant. This isn't Warcraft 3, Zerg units don't get a slight nerf on this map. Every unit costs the same and performs the same, and BOTH players are susceptible to the terrain. There is no such thing as map imbalance!
I play all three races and I actually prefer to play on all of these maps as zerg, Kulas Ravine is very tactical, which is fun with zerg units because you generally have multiple forces. Desert Oasis is great for early zerg play, but it is much more difficult for me as terran, even though they are my main race. If you constantly lose to someone breaking down a back door, you might learn to put a supply depot/pylon nearby. Any race can do this. Every race also has several map control mechanics(zerg's being the best), in addition to the Xel-Naga Towers. Losing on these maps to another player taking advantage of the terrain has nothing to do with balance (or map balance, which is a misnamed and non-balance issue), it has to do with your Strategic Gameplay.
The problem might be that you are getting too greedy as zerg (possibly spoiled by BW's 3hatch before pool greedy styles). The majority of zerg play that I've seen in the opening has been fairly one-dimensional builds that involve fast expansions, with or without speedlings first, though I would very much like to see other openings too. A map like desert oasis however does not favor such a build. Maps shouldn't play exactly the same, but that does not mean imbalance. Everyone can take advantage of the terrain, even zerg. While I don't know if your style is such, here is a good example in your article of being greedy.
On June 19 2010 20:07 Artosis wrote:Viking openings- Viking builds are also very popular on Desert Oasis. Again, the distance between bases makes the great mobility of the Viking a huge problem for Zerg here. Zerg cannot have a four gas economy and Mutalisk tech up in time to deal with one base Vikings. Read the rest of the Article here!
You want to have both Air AND a second base with gas, at the time when he has 1 base air. That is greedy, wanting to not only be on equal footing in army power but be a step up in economic power. Not to mention that this is vs Vikings which can be reactored. Terrans are SUPPOSED to be able to produce a lot of Vikings fast. 1 base vikings starts fast, but loses steam and Vikings are frail. This is like when people suicided ultras into units that kite and scream imba, and then flanked with the ultras and obliterated them.
I do agree with the points you have made. I do think these are terrible maps (except Kulas). These maps do have easy to assault naturals, ledges, rocks, etc. This does affect your race somewhat no matter which you choose. But the races aren't one-dimensional. If you have a difficult to take 3rd expansion, try playing a less resource intensive composition. If it's a lot harder to expand, you have to adapt that into your build. Every player has an easy to assault natural, so complaining that yours is easy to assault is meaningless. You know which map is being used before playing on it. Terrain is actually important now, plan ahead and use good positioning..
As such, I believe there is no such thing as map balance. The only thing the map adds is terrain, which makes certain play STYLES weaker or stronger, but does not imbalance a race. If it's more difficult to surround on a map with zerg, then the tight space is more easily covered by creep tumours or mutalisks, instead of a bulky ground army. Just because a map has a ledge behind the natural doesn't change your units! On any map you are susceptible to drops/runbys/infinite ff/cloaked units/etc.. If you can't account for ledges as drop spots, use the terrain/towers/tumours to gain map control, use terrain to attack him THE SAME WAY he can attack you, or watch destructible rocks, your race is not imbalanced. your play on that map is.
|
On June 19 2010 23:04 0neder wrote:
Maybe people hate desert oasis as PLAYERS, but honestly it is the best SPECTATOR map Blizzard has at the moment. By far the closest in feeling to a Brood War map, and has produced the most exciting games from top players.
Suck it up, the pro gamers have to.
Besides ZvP, I agree that DO makes for games that are interesting to watch, but I also think that well balanced maps like Metalopolis are just as good for spectating. I obviously would rather have more well balanced maps that are also good for watching.
I like to think that Desert Oasis is an attempt at a map like Heartbreak Ridge, which is just very difficult to play, but Desert Oasis has a little more imbalance towards Zerg, mostly for ZvP.
|
On June 19 2010 23:19 OneFierceZealot wrote:"Learn some more about SC before you come in here bashing iCCup." oh my bad... i forgot when i bought StarCraft on the back of the case it came with an instructions on KESPA and their role in the StarCraft universe. sorry just found it. its really interesting. btw i fixed your post + Show Spoiler +
I'm just saying don't come in here bashing what you don't know. If you don't know what you are talking about than don't comment on it. You don't here me coming on here discussing the balance of C&C cause I don't know shit about the game.
Also maybe you should fix you're quote tags since apparently you don't know how to use those. And how does you're "fix" actually make not a shred of sense.
|
I don't really see why difficulty in a fast natural expo is a necessity for good zerg play, I think the problem lies more in the lack of good one base builds (which may be tied back to poor unit diversity).
|
On June 19 2010 22:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 22:13 Artosis wrote:On June 19 2010 22:08 Hider wrote:
Every interview/article I read about Artosis, he always talk about how weak zerg is and how strong all other races are. Then he interviews Tester and make a new thread with the subject that he thinks terran is the strongest race. If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads.
While I do agree that zerg is the weakest race right now, I think that a person with such a respected name as Artosis should be a lot more objective, and not be too biased. And zerg definately has the advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map. "If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads." Thank you, Mr. 74 posts, for coming here and letting everyone know that I am biased and withholding interviews due to conflicting opinions with myself. "And zerg definately has teh advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map." ah ok, thanks, IdrA and I got it wrong. All makes sense now. Thanks for the explanation. Maybe he has - I don't see how pure mech is even viable on desert oasis? There is NO WAY to safely take a 3rd without opening yourself up to counter attack, and the distances are HUGE. Seriously, explain what pure mech you are using on desert oasis to make it imbalanced... I don't get how viking builds are hard to defend on DO, I find them way weaker there than on Scrap Station.
Hi Jinro, mech is quite strong on DO, at least i saw and played many games where it was effetive.
I remember one, i think Asia vs Europe showmatch,Strelok won against a zerg on that map from being behind 2 bases
|
On June 19 2010 23:27 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 23:19 OneFierceZealot wrote:"Learn some more about SC before you come in here bashing iCCup." oh my bad... i forgot when i bought StarCraft on the back of the case it came with an instructions on KESPA and their role in the StarCraft universe. sorry just found it. its really interesting. btw i fixed your post + Show Spoiler + I'm just saying don't come in here bashing what you don't know. If you don't know what you are talking about than don't comment on it. You don't here me coming on here discussing the balance of C&C cause I don't know shit about the game. Also maybe you should fix you're quote tags since apparently you don't know how to use those. And how does you're "fix" actually make not a shred of sense.
Christ man you spelled something wrong... never mind and im pretty sure im not the only one who assumed that when they played on ICCup that ICCup made the maps seeing how it says ICCup Destination, ICCup Fighting Spirit. etc.
|
On June 19 2010 22:51 arnold(soTa) wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 22:45 Geo.Rion wrote:
just LOL on the posts bashing on Artosis coming from <200 posts users. Artosis' viewpoit is really legit, if you want to answer to it, take Morrow as an example, a very good Terran player, and doesnt try to dispatch Artosis' writeup entirely but adds his ideas and corrections, aknowledging at least the TvZ balance issues. (ok maybe im idealizing it, but u get the point)
BTW i was a half-decent Zerg player and Desert Oasis is surely among my 3 least preferred maps, it is really hard and imbalanced. I absolutely can see why terrans and protosses say the same thing, the map's features favor some builds, strategies and tricks, has a tone of abusable stuff on it, almost every player in every matchup can blame the map when he loses, cuz the other one just menaged to abuse it more.
. again with the post count..what does that have to do with _anything at all_ ? the amount you hang on TL equalls your skilllevel, is this what you are implying here? in that case you are sadly misstaken... you can take your 26xx posts and think you are a progamer because of it but it doesnt mean you are better than anyone with say..127 posts.
It s not about skill level, at least not only, but forum newbives bashing on an established and respected member of the community, it doesnt feel right.
And there are a lot of new posters here at TL and a large majority of them post bullshit all the time, so that serve as a base for stereotype.
If someone makes a reasonable and respectful first post against Artosis' article i surely would complement him, but i will surely look down on those who feel they are justified to trashtalk and discredit someone with a star near his name, a name which everybody should know in sc2 community, that s wrong
I hope this answers your question
|
Artosis
United States2140 Posts
On June 19 2010 22:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 22:13 Artosis wrote:On June 19 2010 22:08 Hider wrote:
Every interview/article I read about Artosis, he always talk about how weak zerg is and how strong all other races are. Then he interviews Tester and make a new thread with the subject that he thinks terran is the strongest race. If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads.
While I do agree that zerg is the weakest race right now, I think that a person with such a respected name as Artosis should be a lot more objective, and not be too biased. And zerg definately has the advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map. "If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads." Thank you, Mr. 74 posts, for coming here and letting everyone know that I am biased and withholding interviews due to conflicting opinions with myself. "And zerg definately has teh advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map." ah ok, thanks, IdrA and I got it wrong. All makes sense now. Thanks for the explanation. Maybe he has - I don't see how pure mech is even viable on desert oasis? There is NO WAY to safely take a 3rd without opening yourself up to counter attack, and the distances are HUGE. Seriously, explain what pure mech you are using on desert oasis to make it imbalanced... I don't get how viking builds are hard to defend on DO, I find them way weaker there than on Scrap Station.
if even 1 person could read what was written, they would see that i did not take mech builds into consideration at all when writing this. lol@ the flamers who don't understand what's written.
|
On June 19 2010 23:42 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 22:51 arnold(soTa) wrote:On June 19 2010 22:45 Geo.Rion wrote:
just LOL on the posts bashing on Artosis coming from <200 posts users. Artosis' viewpoit is really legit, if you want to answer to it, take Morrow as an example, a very good Terran player, and doesnt try to dispatch Artosis' writeup entirely but adds his ideas and corrections, aknowledging at least the TvZ balance issues. (ok maybe im idealizing it, but u get the point)
BTW i was a half-decent Zerg player and Desert Oasis is surely among my 3 least preferred maps, it is really hard and imbalanced. I absolutely can see why terrans and protosses say the same thing, the map's features favor some builds, strategies and tricks, has a tone of abusable stuff on it, almost every player in every matchup can blame the map when he loses, cuz the other one just menaged to abuse it more.
. again with the post count..what does that have to do with _anything at all_ ? the amount you hang on TL equalls your skilllevel, is this what you are implying here? in that case you are sadly misstaken... you can take your 26xx posts and think you are a progamer because of it but it doesnt mean you are better than anyone with say..127 posts. It s not about skill level, at least not only, but forum newbives bashing on an established and respected member of the community, it doesnt feel right. And there are a lot of new posters here at TL and a large majority of them post bullshit all the time, so that serve as a base for stereotype. If someone makes a reasonable and respectful first post against Artosis' article i surely would complement him, but i will surely look down on those who feel they are justified to trashtalk and discredit someone with a star near his name, a name which everybody should know in sc2 community, that s wrong I hope this answers your question
You can easily avoid looking like a tool by ignoring it completly.
Many ppl come in a new game, dont even know about teamliquid and are thus treated as "newbies" by ppl like u and artosis, if you think some1 is making a stupid comment in a thread, and you feel you have to point out how newbish he is, I rather you just write down the reason isntead of using bad stereotypes.....
|
On June 19 2010 23:49 arnold(soTa) wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 23:42 Geo.Rion wrote:On June 19 2010 22:51 arnold(soTa) wrote:On June 19 2010 22:45 Geo.Rion wrote:
just LOL on the posts bashing on Artosis coming from <200 posts users. Artosis' viewpoit is really legit, if you want to answer to it, take Morrow as an example, a very good Terran player, and doesnt try to dispatch Artosis' writeup entirely but adds his ideas and corrections, aknowledging at least the TvZ balance issues. (ok maybe im idealizing it, but u get the point)
BTW i was a half-decent Zerg player and Desert Oasis is surely among my 3 least preferred maps, it is really hard and imbalanced. I absolutely can see why terrans and protosses say the same thing, the map's features favor some builds, strategies and tricks, has a tone of abusable stuff on it, almost every player in every matchup can blame the map when he loses, cuz the other one just menaged to abuse it more.
. again with the post count..what does that have to do with _anything at all_ ? the amount you hang on TL equalls your skilllevel, is this what you are implying here? in that case you are sadly misstaken... you can take your 26xx posts and think you are a progamer because of it but it doesnt mean you are better than anyone with say..127 posts. It s not about skill level, at least not only, but forum newbives bashing on an established and respected member of the community, it doesnt feel right. And there are a lot of new posters here at TL and a large majority of them post bullshit all the time, so that serve as a base for stereotype. If someone makes a reasonable and respectful first post against Artosis' article i surely would complement him, but i will surely look down on those who feel they are justified to trashtalk and discredit someone with a star near his name, a name which everybody should know in sc2 community, that s wrong I hope this answers your question You can easily avoid looking like a tool by ignoring it completly. Many ppl come in a new game, dont even know about teamliquid and are thus treated as "newbies" by ppl like u and artosis, if you think some1 is making a stupid comment in a thread, and you feel you have to point out how newbish he is, I rather you just write down the reason isntead of using bad stereotypes.....
i wrote down, disrespecting an established personality of the community, without anything to back it up, but vague thoughts. Artosis' skill level is known, beside post count, while all these nameless posters could be silver leauge level. And i was speaking generally, as there were several god awful posts, couldnt pick out every single one and point out why are bad. I'm not talking about every post or about every post coming from ppl with low postcounts.
|
On June 19 2010 23:48 Artosis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2010 22:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 19 2010 22:13 Artosis wrote:On June 19 2010 22:08 Hider wrote:
Every interview/article I read about Artosis, he always talk about how weak zerg is and how strong all other races are. Then he interviews Tester and make a new thread with the subject that he thinks terran is the strongest race. If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads.
While I do agree that zerg is the weakest race right now, I think that a person with such a respected name as Artosis should be a lot more objective, and not be too biased. And zerg definately has the advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map. "If he had answered zerg, I am sure we would not have seen any new threads." Thank you, Mr. 74 posts, for coming here and letting everyone know that I am biased and withholding interviews due to conflicting opinions with myself. "And zerg definately has teh advantage over terran on desert oasis as mech is extremely difficult to play on this map." ah ok, thanks, IdrA and I got it wrong. All makes sense now. Thanks for the explanation. Maybe he has - I don't see how pure mech is even viable on desert oasis? There is NO WAY to safely take a 3rd without opening yourself up to counter attack, and the distances are HUGE. Seriously, explain what pure mech you are using on desert oasis to make it imbalanced... I don't get how viking builds are hard to defend on DO, I find them way weaker there than on Scrap Station. if even 1 person could read what was written, they would see that i did not take mech builds into consideration at all when writing this. lol@ the flamers who don't understand what's written.
are thors and hellions not mech?
also terran bio gets pretty trashed by Zerg, infestor baneling armies just demolish if, especially on DO were you have huge terrain advantage in almiost every spot, except perhaps the choke from one side of your nat.
I disslike how u use the short distances on maps as a reason for Z being weak, then you use long distances as reason why Z is weak, which is it?
|
Bashing down on peoples postcount doesn't help your argument, seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
