|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On January 09 2011 08:21 CoR wrote:
for all flamers who say the new maps are too big, you cant be from the sc1 communty ...
you will find out sooner or later that its not "funny" to see every game an allin rush, long macro games can be way more entertainment and when i see the first 1hour games on GSL i will be so haaaappy
The maps are really big. I don't think they're going to make for very entertaining games to be honest with you. But time will tell I guess.
|
I am just glad there will be 4 new maps. Even if 2 of them end up sucking real bad, it would be a fresh change and they can just replace the bad ones later anyways and mappers can learn from it. Not only does the game need to evolve so does the maps and the community can actually assist with that. Props to gomtv.
On a side note, having a team and practicing with the team or friends is going to be even more important for these players as they likely won`t be on ladder map pool.
Will also be interesting to see which top players can learn and pick up strats on a new map fast.
|
crossfire, the blizzard one of the 4 in the OP, has still got that god damn back door rocks gimmick ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5ETz2.png)
|
United States7166 Posts
i disagree plexa..i find larger maps usually provide more entertaining games as the more spread out a player becomes, the more effective smaller forces of units and tactics become vs them. harassment is more effective vs players who are spread out and multiple attacks/battles going on usually makes games more entertaining. also wide open centers allow for more freedom of control, unit positioning, and flanks
|
On January 09 2011 08:55 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 08:21 CoR wrote:
for all flamers who say the new maps are too big, you cant be from the sc1 communty ...
you will find out sooner or later that its not "funny" to see every game an allin rush, long macro games can be way more entertainment and when i see the first 1hour games on GSL i will be so haaaappy The maps are really big. I don't think they're going to make for very entertaining games to be honest with you. But time will tell I guess.
Agreed, +1 from the iCCup map team. Good large maps are extremely entertaining, but these are lacking necessary key features.
But this is an amazing initiative by GOM, and is a step in the right direction.
Keep in mind these mappers are very talented, they just haven't had enough experience with map size affecting game play. Additionally, nobody really knows how new macro mechanics, creep, and warp gates affect late game balance.
|
United States7166 Posts
also i really like their use of watch towers and also tall grass. especially those wide ramp hills on tal'darim altar, the same mechanic is being used a lot in bw maps now and I liked it there too. (the ones with a ramp up and ramp down right next to each other, and very little high ground in between
|
This news makes me so happy. Even if these maps are awful this is still a move in the right direction. I really don't care if it effects balance and IMO blizzard has focused to much on balance/MU %'s.
I would rather have a game that is fun to play/watch but is imbalanced than a game that is boring to play/watch but has perfect balance.
|
On January 09 2011 08:55 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 08:21 CoR wrote:
for all flamers who say the new maps are too big, you cant be from the sc1 communty ...
you will find out sooner or later that its not "funny" to see every game an allin rush, long macro games can be way more entertainment and when i see the first 1hour games on GSL i will be so haaaappy The maps are really big. I don't think they're going to make for very entertaining games to be honest with you. But time will tell I guess.
The maps are extremely large. I think people are mistaking longer games with bigger armies for more exciting games. I'm in favor of changing the map pool to maps that are more similar to Shakuras, but these maps seem like an extreme change from what players are used to. We may be throwing away balance for the sake of eliminating short games from the GSL.
Professional players will have to learn the game all over again and that's really the only way to find out.
|
Awesome, can't wait to see Pro games on those maps, who knows, we may see some crazy new strategies on these maps.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On January 09 2011 09:01 Zelniq wrote:
i disagree plexa..i find larger maps usually provide more entertaining games as the more spread out a player becomes, the more effective smaller forces of units and tactics become vs them. harassment is more effective vs players who are spread out and multiple attacks/battles going on usually makes games more entertaining. also wide open centers allow for more freedom of control, unit positioning, and flanks
I think Monitor summed up it perfectly:
On January 09 2011 09:02 monitor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 08:55 Plexa wrote:On January 09 2011 08:21 CoR wrote:
for all flamers who say the new maps are too big, you cant be from the sc1 communty ...
you will find out sooner or later that its not "funny" to see every game an allin rush, long macro games can be way more entertainment and when i see the first 1hour games on GSL i will be so haaaappy The maps are really big. I don't think they're going to make for very entertaining games to be honest with you. But time will tell I guess. Agreed, +1 from the iCCup map team. Good large maps are extremely entertaining, but these are lacking necessary key features. But this is an amazing initiative by GOM, and is a step in the right direction. Keep in mind these mappers are very talented, they just haven't had enough experience with map size affecting game play. Additionally, nobody really knows how new macro mechanics, creep, and warp gates affect late game balance.
|
On January 09 2011 09:04 grandmoose wrote:
This news makes me so happy. Even if these maps are awful this is still a move in the right direction. I really don't care if it effects balance and IMO blizzard has focused to much on balance/MU %'s.
I would rather have a game that is fun to play/watch but is imbalanced than a game that is boring to play/watch but has perfect balance.
Kind of funny how BWs imbalances made it balanced.
Medic Marine Imba
Tanks Imba
Spider Mines Imba
Storm Imba
Reaver Imba
Defiler Imba
EMP Imba
Alot of imba made the game balenced
|
YES!!!
I freaking hate those maps mentioned in the OP for removal. I feel that jungle basin sucks as well
|
Those new maps definitely look interesting, however they lack xel'naga watch towers (at least it looks like that from the map preview, not sure though).
On the visual side, sigh, I wonder why no one makes a fitting lava, desert or sand map (especially when they want to remove blistering sands aswell). From the looks of it GSL will have dozens of jungle maps, then those bluish ones and a few urban ones. Makes me hope, that they have much more maps that they will test out.
|
United States7166 Posts
you cant tell from the map preview but there are plenty of watch towers. 4 towers in the center of aiur garden and tal darim temple. one seeing the whole center area on biohazard and 2 on crossfire
|
Regardless of how good or bad the maps are, they're going to be better than
Steppes of War, Delta Quadrant, Blistering Sands and unknown one.
|
Firstly, iirc Blizzard said they support the fact that tournament organizers are stepping up and making their own custom map pool.
Secondly, these maps are definitely not too big.
This is a real time strategy game so I like it when the maps gives me the tools to execute bigger scale strategies. More importantly, some units and upgrades are going to be extremely valuable, adding more depth and giving the player choices. I'm thinking about sensor towers / detection units as well as air units speed upgrades. Finally, army positionning and multitasking are going to have a bigger impact.
Really, it's all about strategy.
edit: I'm not 100% positive about these specific maps though. Not familiar with map features etc. As people said they may indeed lack some key stuff needed to provide entertainement.
|
On January 09 2011 09:34 Zelniq wrote:
you cant tell from the map preview but there are plenty of watch towers. 4 towers in the center of aiur garden and tal darim temple. one seeing the whole center area on biohazard and 2 on crossfire
I don't think there are any on Biohazard (I obs'd a game), are you sure?
On the other maps, the XNT's are pretty standard but good. On Aiur Garden, are those LoS blockers on the edge of a path? That could be a cool way to hide units...
|
So, I played a bunch of games on these maps, in random vs random matchups to get a variety. As every race, I went CC/Nexus/hatch first and felt safe doing it and my opponent usually went rax into CC or gate into CC or hatch first. The games were tons of fun to play, but it really did take a while before the game would be fun to watch. There is always downtime at the beggining of matches, this will simply increase that downtime, but make for a more fun map experience.
Also, PvP and ZvZ aren't as much of a rushfest on these maps. Huzzah!
|
On January 09 2011 09:37 AlBundy wrote:
Firstly, iirc Blizzard said they support the fact that tournament organizers are stepping up and making their own custom map pool.
Secondly, these maps are definitely not too big.
This is a real time strategy game so I like it when the maps gives me the tools to execute bigger scale strategies. More importantly, some units and upgrades are going to be extremely valuable, adding more depth and giving the player choices. I'm thinking about sensor towers / detection units as well as air units speed upgrades. Finally, army positionning and multitasking are going to have a bigger impact.
Really, it's all about strategy.
edit: I'm not 100% positive about these specific maps though. Not familiar with map features etc.
Hey, why don't you have a 256x256 map where a Zerg can make a million drones without ever being punished for it. That's a great idea, eh? It promotes so much strategy!
|
Taldarim Altar looks beautiful, especially the center. But I think it might favor Zerg a lot though since there are a lot of expansions on the map.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
