This maps are a great addiction to the GSL.. but not to the ladder , im sorry but i dont want to play 1 hour matches , im in lower leagues and i prefer small to medium maps.. these maps doesnt make players macro better they just make them live longer..

PkP

Sweden54 Posts

February 01 2011 12:10 GMT

#325

"Crevasse" makes my dookie twinkle, god that map looks superb! I have my doubts about the rest of them since they seem a bit, I dunno, narrow, too many small chokes and not that many wide open areas

Phanekim

United States777 Posts

February 01 2011 12:22 GMT

#326

i'm curious the lopsided results...how the maps work. i think the rush distances should help z/p tremendously. very obvious statement. but i wonder how much of that was a factor in this pervious gsl.

these maps resemble more xel naga caverns. anyone got some stats on xel naga caverns?

LuckyGnomTV

Russian Federation367 Posts

February 01 2011 12:31 GMT

#327

I miss biohazard - its really great, much better than Crevasse imho

Soluhwin

United States1287 Posts

February 01 2011 12:40 GMT

#328

It feels like it would be really easy to siege the counter-clockwise main on TerminusRe from the natural third.

edit: never mind the distance is longer than it looks.

Also, it seems the mapmakers overused destructible rocks. On a couple of the maps you can't even take a third without enough units to kill the rocks. Even though zerg responding to early expands by fast expanding twice has kinda phased out, still doesn't seem right.

Vei

United States2845 Posts

February 01 2011 12:42 GMT

#329

On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:

Show nested quote +

Thank you idrA. Thank You.

hahahaha<3 YES

idra, zerg hero-prince ~

Zeon0

Austria2995 Posts

February 01 2011 12:47 GMT

#330

On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:

Show nested quote +

Thank you idrA. Thank You.

quoted for fucking truth!

CaptainCrush

United States785 Posts

February 01 2011 12:53 GMT

#331

Taldarim alter? that one is waaaaaayyyyyy too big. I played it a couple times and its just crazy.... I'm all for adding new maps though

Take a hint Blizzard?

Noxie

United States2227 Posts

February 01 2011 13:03 GMT

#332

Havn't got to play them first hand (gonna put that on today's to do list) bu from what I see and have heard is that they are pretty dam nice. I am glad GSL is doing this.. this in hope will lead to eventually adding them onto the ladder.

BLinD-RawR

ALLEYCAT BLUES49904 Posts

February 01 2011 13:09 GMT

#333

On February 01 2011 18:47 Janook wrote:
Looks like the people at gomTV dont' understand the Terran race.

The sheer size, and how the naturals and 3rds are situated, automatically make these maps difficult for Terran.

try to adapt to new maps...or better yet..wait until the pros spoon feed us with free builds.

Adapting to a new map is a necessity for players if they want to evolve in SC2.

Zeon0

Austria2995 Posts

February 01 2011 13:13 GMT

#334

Terran whines are just ridiculous, Zerg had to deal with maps like Steppes or DQ for months and you guys complain before they are even out? There are new maps, deal with it

IntoTheSnow

Singapore49 Posts

February 01 2011 13:18 GMT

#335

I hope that the turret price will decrease back to 75, so you will see terran spam turrets once again whenever vsing zerg. Dont you terrans miss the days with 15 turrets per base? That should be the macro terran we should see in future. I see SKY terran more viable on these bigger maps too. Just have to fix raven stupid seeker missile back to beta.

Zorgaz

Sweden2951 Posts

February 01 2011 13:44 GMT

#336

Seems nice, some off the maps are looking almost too big but then again it seems that 3/4 of the maps can have both close/cross positions which would be cool since it adds variety to the maps! Looking forward seeing the pros playing on the maps!