|
GomTV just announced new maps for GSTL: http://esports.gomtv.com/gsl/community/view.gom?msgid=7167
All those maps are playable on KR, EU, NA, SEA, TW servers. Search 'GSL' to enjoy. I Xeph officially represent LSPrime and JackyPrime outside of Korea. I sent those maps to smileyyy(EU), [SCC]Faust(NA), [wh]_ForAlways(NA), MeLo(SEA). Beta(TW), and they uploaded on the servers.
Official map pool
Shakuras Plateau, Scrap Station, Metalopolis, Lost Temple, Xel'Naga Caverns, Crevass, Crossfire SE, Terminus RE, Tal'Darim Altar
New maps image
1. Crevasse (custom,크레바스, KR EU NA SEA avilable) by JackyPrime
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cu7qL.jpg)
2. Crossfire SE(customized blizzard,KR EU NA SEA available) by JackyPrime
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/SDCgt.jpg)
3. Terminus Re(customized Blizzard,터미누스 Re, KR EU NA SEA available) by LSPrime
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/qIzfW.jpg)
4. Tal'Darim Altar(custom, 탈다림 제단, KR EU NA SEA available) by LSPrime
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/TjtDm.jpg)
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
Related thread
GSL official map change SOON™
UPDATES
1. All those maps got final update for the league. 19:26 6 Feb 2011 KST
|
These maps give me tinkly feelings down under.
|
Looking nice, I do have my doubts about crossfire though, so many chokes. Still better than Jungle Basin, looks like you can actually flank there.
Also, I might be wrong here, but isnt that basically Peaks of Baekdu(sp)?
|
|
|
Hm, not sure how I like Terminus Re and Tal'Darim Altar...they just seem really big. 16 bases for a 1v1? In SC2, not sure how that's gonna pan out.
|
First three - awesome, I like them.
Tal'darim Altar - I think it's overboard. I'll be okay if this is the only supergigantic map in there, for variety and near-guaranteed macro games, but I think it should be the only one.
|
Good to see an official announcement now, and all the maps are available on all the servers gonna have to give them a try after classes today
|
So are these maps ever going to be added to ladder?
|
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
|
I don't care about balance. They are new and shiny, that's all I care about.
|
Will these maps be censored? =)
Time will show if they are balanced.
|
Now all blizzard needs to do is add these maps on ladder..
|
I saw some excellent TvZ on Terminus, really pumped about this.
Taldarim is gigantic >< And what's the point of putting rocks in all expansions, it prevents fast double or triple expand, why would you make a 1v1 map with a 4v4 player size if you put rocks everywhere ?
|
Wil these maps be added to ladder?? :O
|
I think it'll be interesting to see these new maps in action. GSTL is gonna be great even if there are no foreigners participating.
|
So how exactly is Scrap modified? 2 bunkers in farchoke on right side or wtf?
EDIT: ok they meant LT, that makes a bit more sense...
|
On January 31 2011 23:50 Silu wrote:
So how exactly is Scrap modified? 2 bunkers in farchoke on right side or wtf?
EDIT: ok they meant LT, that makes a bit more sense...
my bad. sorry 
|
Did they modify the positional imbalances on Scrap? I would hope they would do that too (width of second entrance to Nat, creep spread from main, width of main path between bases).
|
Played yesterday with my friend on Crossfire, Tal'Darim Altar and Crevasse.
They are MUCH bigger but it sometimes gives you a false sense of security as well. Like Tal'Darim Altar, if you both spawn on bottom location it is a very fast rush from natural to natural.
But overall I love these maps, we played on all the GSL maps and it is a blast. Both players are on
3 bases pretty fast and you just feel so happy playing on these maps. (It was ZvP)
SCII will soon be played as it should be.
Thank You GoM.
Thank You.
|
Btw, too bad they didn't use Biohazard. It was like shakuras, I like the simple architecture of the map, without a maze like center, without chokes everywhere, I fear Crevasse and Taldarim will produce turtle fest games.
|
51398 Posts
On January 31 2011 23:44 insaneMicro wrote:
Looking nice, I do have my doubts about crossfire though, so many chokes. Still better than Jungle Basin, looks like you can actually flank there.
Also, I might be wrong here, but isnt that basically Peaks of Baekdu(sp)?
yes, it is just a blizzard sc2 port of Sin Peaks of Baekdu.
strange how they decided to copy that out of all the other potential maps that could have been stolen (cough luna, fighting spirit).
|
I hope that these new maps will encourage more macro oriented matches when they're implemented.
|
One great part of this is the change in the ability to block the ramp with 2 bunkers on the classic maps (and the new ones i assume). I like that the new maps and the changes to the old ones are starting to solve the balance issues in the ZvT matchup. Also i think these maps will make the PvT matchup the most interesting one since there are lots more options in that matchup. Additionally, the availability of expansions will probably stop the aggressive 4gate v. 4 gate PvP style and encourage more expansionist play. I hope for motherships on these maps because of the easier expansions. (can you imagine Mothership v. Mothership battles?)
|
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map?
|
United States7481 Posts
On January 31 2011 23:56 pdd wrote:
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map?
the ramp out of the main is no longer double width, and i think they did something with the middle blue expos but i'm not sure.
so I guess the map pool is the 7 maps mentioned: Crossfire, Crevasse, Tal'Darim Altar, Terminus RE, Lost Temple, Metalopolis, Xel'naga Caverns.
|
On January 31 2011 23:57 Antoine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2011 23:56 pdd wrote:
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map? the ramp out of the main is no longer double width, and i think they did something with the middle blue expos but i'm not sure. so I guess the map pool is the 7 maps mentioned: Crossfire, Crevasse, Tal'Darim Altar, Terminus RE, Lost Temple, Metalopolis, Xel'naga Caverns.
+ Shakuras I guess ?
Perhaps the ycould customize metalopolis so you can't spawn close vertical.
|
On January 31 2011 23:57 Antoine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2011 23:56 pdd wrote:
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map? the ramp out of the main is no longer double width, and i think they did something with the middle blue expos but i'm not sure. so I guess the map pool is the 7 maps mentioned: Crossfire, Crevasse, Tal'Darim Altar, Terminus RE, Lost Temple, Metalopolis, Xel'naga Caverns.
I updated OP.
Official map pool: Shakuras Plateau, Scrap Station, Metalopolis, Lost Temple, Xel'Naga Caverns, Crevass, Crossfire SE, Terminus RE, Tal'Darim Altar
|
Go GOM, love the new maps and the change in the ramps for Blizz maps
|
On January 31 2011 23:57 Antoine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2011 23:56 pdd wrote:
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map? the ramp out of the main is no longer double width, and i think they did something with the middle blue expos but i'm not sure. so I guess the map pool is the 7 maps mentioned: Crossfire, Crevasse, Tal'Darim Altar, Terminus RE, Lost Temple, Metalopolis, Xel'naga Caverns.
They cut steppes of war?
|
On February 01 2011 00:02 AyahuascaSage wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2011 23:57 Antoine wrote:On January 31 2011 23:56 pdd wrote:
Anyone know what modifications they did to the Crossfire map? the ramp out of the main is no longer double width, and i think they did something with the middle blue expos but i'm not sure. so I guess the map pool is the 7 maps mentioned: Crossfire, Crevasse, Tal'Darim Altar, Terminus RE, Lost Temple, Metalopolis, Xel'naga Caverns. They cut steppes of war?
Yes.
|
I just noticed that close-positions Crevasse has long rush distances, and shorter distances blocked by rocks.
I've been thinking for a while that this is an elegant solution to the Terran map-size balance issue, and I'm glad to see it getting tried out. It also makes the map more distinct, which I'm a big fan of.
I like that you can put an overlord over the rivers out of ground unit range in crossfire, and see a push coming easily despite the multiple routes.
It'll take exactly one (1) game of someone abusing rotational symmetry in Terminus Re for TL to declare it the worstest map EVAR.
Tal'Darim Altar is so big your mom thinks it's balanced. Still, it's good to push to macro style maps to the extreme, if only for the learnan'.
|
I love the new maps and all......but what the hell is with that last map?
I fear that future GSL matches will need to take more than 3 hours for a single round......that would be so unwatchable....
|
More excited to see the top play on these maps then actually playing on them myself at the moment. Tho wouldn't mind seeing them appear in the map pool rotation if we ever get it....
|
On February 01 2011 00:05 Ribbon wrote:
It'll take exactly one (1) game of someone abusing rotational symmetry in Terminus Re for TL to declare it the worstest map EVAR.
Rotational symmetry existed in BW without many problems. The balance differences between rotationally different spawn positions won't be greater than differing spawn positions on a map like say Metalopolis.
|
hopefully these all turn out competition worthy and we get them in the GSL as well and later on the ladder or atleast the modified versions of already existing maps. Problem with ladder being of course if other leagues picks other maps and so forth but we shall overcome!
Either way this is great news and makes it alot more interesting to watch the upcoming GSTL. Major cred to GomTV.
|
Yes I'm sure slightly bigger maps will make the average duration from like 13-14 minutes to 1h (assuming you meant BO3). Even Shakuras cross positions doesn't usually take long.
|
Number #3 and #4 will suck shit if you get close pos.
|
On February 01 2011 00:06 mavyric wrote:
I love the new maps and all......but what the hell is with that last map?
I fear that future GSL matches will need to take more than 3 hours for a single round......that would be so unwatchable....
I doubt it. I'm sure players like BitBytBit will find a way how to take the svc's from the mineral line ^^
But joking aside these maps aren't really any bigger than in BW and SC2 is more fast paced game at least in my opinion. I doubt it will go quite that long but at least they will be longer than the average 8min or so.
|
United Kingdom38156 Posts
This is awesome news, I really like what GOM have been doing in regards to new maps, and the modification of existing maps to prevent bunker blocking at the ramp is a very smart change imo.
Yet another reason to be excited for the Team League, hopefully it goes well and the idea carries into the GSL itself.
|
|
|
Oh my god GSL just went up +100 points in my opinion. Can't wait to see high level games on these maps.
|
On February 01 2011 00:10 Termit wrote:
Number #3 and #4 will suck shit if you get close pos.
Close positions aren't really nearly as close they look like
|
hopefully they can keep churning maps out to prevent the competition from getting stagnant. i come from wc3 where we had same map pool for a few years so it got kinda old... heard it wasnt an issue in bw as maps were periodically released.. hope sc2 will be same way!
|
Seems like the new trend is rotational symmetry.
Very interesting
|
They should modify Metalopolis so you can't spawn in close positions, like shakuras plateau.
|
Looking forward to watch a TvT cross position on Taldarim Altar. Even better if one of the player is Goody. Yummmm that will be like Yankees vs Red Sox on SC2. Can't wait!
|
Really pleased with those maps, really hope that they either enter them into ladder, or that the other major tournaments(I'm looking at you MLG) adopt the same map list, it'd be awkward as all hell to have to practice copious maps for different tournaments, and seeing as GSL is one of the largest, I hope this sets a precedent.
Also InB4 Avilo zerg macro is unstoppable et al. These maps should encourage expanding, more positional play, and reward more solid mechanical players, makes it that much more fun to spectate and play :D
|
I'm excited, pretty big maps can't wait to see how things'll go :D
|
Thank you Gom. Thank you. I have high faith in these maps and time will tell if they are ready for 1v1s. SC2 is going to be played properly on proper maps. Hope that these maps get added in the ladder pool also.
|
Why is there a rock or a cliff or an expansion every 10 feet on every one of these maps?
Goodluck trying to flank, zerg.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
Crevasse too?SWEET!!
Crevasse is a map where you can mech as well as you can play Bio as Terran.I think that you should be better off with 1 rax CC instead of gay 2 rax all-in because you can pretty much get your natural for free.
|
This is a great improvement should see way better games!!
|
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
|
Yes there are towers in the middle around the corners of the big plateau.
|
these maps are soo much better than the blizzard maps honestly...I've played/casted some epic matches on them...I'm surprised they didn't add the legacy of the void
|
On February 01 2011 00:29 TheXenocide1 wrote:
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
Crevasse has none I think.
Crossfire has two.
Terminus and Taldarim Altar have four
|
On February 01 2011 00:31 pdd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 00:29 TheXenocide1 wrote:
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
Crevasse has none I think. Crossfire has two. Terminus and Taldarim Altar have four
crevasse has 4, look at each corner of middle plateau.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 00:31 pdd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 00:29 TheXenocide1 wrote:
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
Crevasse has none I think. Crossfire has two. Terminus and Taldarim Altar have four
Crevasse has 4 on each corner of the center ramp...hidden behind bushes.
|
On February 01 2011 00:34 Tennet wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 00:31 pdd wrote:On February 01 2011 00:29 TheXenocide1 wrote:
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
Crevasse has none I think. Crossfire has two. Terminus and Taldarim Altar have four crevasse has 4, look at each corner of middle plateau.
Oh yeah, now that you reminded me, I suddenly recall watching a cast where a tower played a role in spotting a proxy starport.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 00:35 pdd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 00:34 Tennet wrote:On February 01 2011 00:31 pdd wrote:On February 01 2011 00:29 TheXenocide1 wrote:
are there xel'naga towers on these maps? I cannot really tell
Crevasse has none I think. Crossfire has two. Terminus and Taldarim Altar have four crevasse has 4, look at each corner of middle plateau. Oh yeah, now that you reminded me, I suddenly recall watching a cast where a tower played a role in spotting a proxy starport.
Strangely....I was also reminded of the game when this thread was announced....
|
Amazing they are adding new maps. Not sure i like these just yet but at this point any change is greatly welcome. Crossfire is a choke-fest but hopefully it's not too terran favored.
|
Making it so you can't block the ramp is brilliant. Do iccup maps have that feature yet?
|
I hope stopping bunkers from blocking ramps doesn't stop 1 depo 1 rax bottom of the ramp wall
|
Anybody know what they changed about Crossfire?
|
All the new additions are great except crossfire, which is ridiculously hard for PvZ (huge open nat, big rush distance, lots of bases). It'll be interesting to see the strategies people come up with for these maps. Hopefully gameplay will go beyond "make 5 marines pull scvs and pray."
|
wtfbbq @ the high ground in-base natural on Crevasse. There's gonna be so many siege tanks parked up there it's not even funny, not exactly sure I like that...
The rest of the maps actually seem pretty sweet, I'm excited. Just sucks players won't get the chance to practice on them in ladder games.
|
On February 01 2011 00:42 Nizaris wrote:
Amazing they are adding new maps. Not sure i like these just yet but at this point any change is greatly welcome. Crossfire is a choke-fest but hopefully it's not too terran favored.
It's less of a choke-fest than Scrap Station (similar rush distances too), and zergs do just fine on that map.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 00:50 MrPrezbo wrote:
Anybody know what they changed about Crossfire?
monitor seems to have noted the changes from the other thread.
On January 20 2011 15:50 monitor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2011 14:13 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:About the Crossfire SE map, can someone point out any other changes besides the main's ramp to the natural being smaller? (now the size of any ramp on a standard map like LT, instead of 1 size larger in Blizz's) thanks in advance These are the changes I know: -Main's ramp made 1x standard size -3o'clock and 9o'clock expansions smaller -middle side paths smaller (to expos) -primary ramp to center high ground widened (1side, the original was asymmetrical) -doodad trees added in unpathable areas /edit Image Comparison-- + Show Spoiler [New] ++ Show Spoiler [Old] +
|
On February 01 2011 00:52 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote:
All the new additions are great except crossfire, which is ridiculously hard for PvZ (huge open nat, big rush distance, lots of bases)."
Yes it would be terrible if protoss had to take more than 2 bases and defend thier natural in the early game....
|
|
|
this is awesome!! Hopefully this will carry over into the GSL proper.
|
feels like deja vu. I thought this thread was up several days ago.
|
I hope the other tournament hosts follow GSL's lead and implement these maps, too. I'm glad Gretech is taking a proactive approach. Thanks for leading by example and taking our concerns into consideration!
|
For people worried about map feature XYZ, I'm sure they have play tested these maps some to insure the lay outs will not allow for extremly cheesy things to happen.
Overall I like the changes, on a large map the match ups are closer to balanced. This evident by all the amazing games in the GSL that have come out of Shakuras cross positions, where honestly I don't think any one race has really dominated but there has been a ton of back and forth.
This should also help zerg early game a ton, as prior to lair and overseers zerg just doen't have enough map distance on a lot of maps to be reactive like they need to be. Additionally should help protoss to not die as easily to cloaked banshee's as they'll also have time to scout and get a robo or cannons up if need be.
2 thumbs up for me on these map choices...now if only blizzard would get rid of all of their imbalanced small maps so the ladder doesn't have Z playing on only 4 or 5 maps in the pool because they absolutely have to downvote Steppes, Delta, and LT.
|
![[image loading]](http://chrup-mi-berlo.com/sc2/mapa.jpg)
hi...
what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X?
I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced;
- Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base)
- Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras.
- Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd.
|
huge maps... I liked one or two small maps in the pool, its good to have variety and things on both sides.
|
I'm hoping these new maps will make it possible for zergs to actually get far in GSL - not because of luck, but because of legit skill. Can't wait to see what happens.
|
I like the look of these maps! Bigger maps hopefully will bring longer and more epic games!
On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:
hi...
what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X?
I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced;
- Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base)
- Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras.
- Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd.
On other hand, you can take the base left of the red X, take the base you marked as "3", and now you have 3 bases with ridicilously close air distance. Well you might even nydus from somewhere to that left side so it's closer by ground.
You'll find workarounds.
--
*edit* Now that I think of it, that allows very easy 4th and 5th base aswell.
*edit2* Or...well, taking those 3 I mentioned might not be so easy after all <.< How'd you defend a far away base from aggression?
|
I seriously like the first impression of these maps, looking forward how the games evolves around these.
Would appreciate if Blizzard would update the map pool.
|
nice maps... But i highly doubt we would see them in any weekly cup... They are way to big... People dont have 24h to play a single tournament. They are nice for GSL cause they play like 3 matches a day only.
|
I really don't like crossfire at first glance.. the chokes.
|
Uuuh, I just saw the change on the current maps. I like that anti-block-ramp feature.
And know I finally get what the change on Crossfire is, very nice aswell. This is a good step in the right direction, together with ESL changing mappool, I hope all leagues catch that train.
|
On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd.
-Zerg can take any of the bases at the 3 o'clock side. He's got the more mobile army.
-Muta can go the long way and hit the Terran's third. Turrets are kind of expensive in this game, too. You can also fly in from the side. It doesn't matter if the Terran sees the mutas two seconds before they get into his base. Mutas are fast.
-If the Terran is turtling to block a ground army, just take the whole fucking map.
|
On February 01 2011 01:12 Frankon wrote:
nice maps... But i highly doubt we would see them in any weekly cup... They are way to big... People dont have 24h to play a single tournament. They are nice for GSL cause they play like 3 matches a day only.
Hopefully, the bigger tournaments adopt these maps like MLG, IEM, DreamHack, ESL, ESP, etc.
|
|
|
Nice to see them taking some balance into their own hands.
|
On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:Show nested quote +
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
And shove it up, cheesers!
|
Crossfire is going to be heavily terran favor. If i spawn top i will want to control the NorthWest Xelnaga tower. If you control this tower you basically control the entire upper map and vice versa for the other one. Tank at the tower will basically be the key on this map and i dislike that alot since it will give zerg a hard time in breaking terran.
Of course this wont matter that much in TvP since protoss ForceField will smash bio coming in through the choke. I think mech play will be stronger on this map vs toss
|
Not a big fan of Terminus too easy to get 3 bases ;; Terran and protoss will really need to cheese or end the game quickly I think, which will be a trend on that map, its so hard to harass unlee you go drops or air because it is 1 choke for 3 bases. Just my 0.02$.
|
On February 01 2011 01:16 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd. -Zerg can take any of the bases at the 3 o'clock side. He's got the more mobile army. -Muta can go the long way and hit the Terran's third. Turrets are kind of expensive in this game, too. You can also fly in from the side. It doesn't matter if the Terran sees the mutas two seconds before they get into his base. Mutas are fast. -If the Terran is turtling to block a ground army, just take the whole fucking map.
Isn't the terran "third" also a low mineral base with only one gas? It's not like a full base.
|
hey, it is not about how to defeat terran in these spot locations...
I was trying to said that terran`s play at this map should be much easier than zerg`s (in that locations).
zerg have to destroy the rocks to get a base which is harder to defend, than terrans 3rd.
also notice that some aggresion from terran can easily prevent from taking 3rd base by zerg... (siege tanks at higher ground in the middle of the map)
|
On February 01 2011 01:26 NuKedUFirst wrote:
Not a big fan of Terminus too easy to get 3 bases ;; Terran and protoss will really need to cheese or end the game quickly I think, which will be a trend on that map, its so hard to harass unlee you go drops or air because it is 1 choke for 3 bases. Just my 0.02$.
The third only has 1 gas and i think that map try to encourage macro game and we shall finally see which race is indeed stronger in the late game :3. Also its a good experiment to see how well big map do and the number of bases that each race are on can effect the game. Great map for experimenting imo
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 01:27 LaughingTulkas wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:16 Ribbon wrote:On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd. -Zerg can take any of the bases at the 3 o'clock side. He's got the more mobile army. -Muta can go the long way and hit the Terran's third. Turrets are kind of expensive in this game, too. You can also fly in from the side. It doesn't matter if the Terran sees the mutas two seconds before they get into his base. Mutas are fast. -If the Terran is turtling to block a ground army, just take the whole fucking map. Isn't the terran "third" also a low mineral base with only one gas? It's not like a full base.
yeah but its high yield gas.
|
So excited to see these new maps in play!!
|
Crossfire is horrid for zerg, but still many of these maps are better than the ones we have to play now lol@DQ
|
Yeah Crossfire seems to have way to many chokes and runarounds imo. Good tank placements will be second to impossible to break it seems.
|
Now oGsMC is playing new maps on Gisado Star-Challenge. I'll post a thread as soon as VOD's up.
|
Cross fire is not going to be pleasant... 8 bases plus a ridiculous amount of chokes
|
Doomdrop experimentation rather than cry in forums?
|
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps.
|
this is great news
so glad they got rid of steppes of war
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 01:38 Xeph wrote:
Now oGsMC is playing new maps on Gisado Star-Challenge. I'll post a thread as soon as VOD's up.
any liquid guys yet?please ask Gisado for any foreigner reps....if its possible.
|
wow thats absolutely awesome!
i'm so happy
|
On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps.
I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies.
|
On February 01 2011 01:26 NuKedUFirst wrote:
Not a big fan of Terminus too easy to get 3 bases ;; Terran and protoss will really need to cheese or end the game quickly I think, which will be a trend on that map, its so hard to harass unlee you go drops or air because it is 1 choke for 3 bases. Just my 0.02$.
Well Terran and Protsos could *gasp* take a 3rd and even *gasp gasp* a 4th base!!!!!
These maps must be imba towards zerg because the zerg player can take bases and terrans and toss cannot take more than two or else they will have to "end the game quickly". Its quite silly to think this way more bases does not mean that terran or toss is automatically at a disadvantage. It has just been in the T/P mind that more bases makes zerg infinitely better while if they took more bases it would not make them better. These new maps are going to change the way the game is played in the GSL.
|
All the maps, except maybe Crevasse, look amazing. Though even Crevasse is light years better than most of the maps right now.
|
I think this will open up newer strategies for terran to play macro games
imagine a terran on 5-6 bases with 6k minerals in the bank, and 15-20 barracks, 4 factories, 4 starports just waiting for 200/200 to go down to 110 supply so the terran can re-max.
now that would be awesome.
|
I can't wait to play on [image loading], having problems getting images loaded.
New maps look decent.
|
Glad to see they implemented new maps, hopefully this should make for some more entertaining games.
|
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
Can we find these map versions too?
|
On February 01 2011 01:51 Veldril wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps. I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies.
I'm genuinely curious. How does a big tournament NOT translate to the ladder game (not needed in ladder)? Iono about you but when I play, I strive to play to the best of my ability, whether it be in a friendly pickup game or the GSL finals. When pro's are complaining about something fundamnetally and strategically imbalanced (for lack of a better word) AND their complaints are answered then why wouldn't it apply to ladder?
What 'variety' of strategies are you talking about? If you're talking about an auto-win for most Terrans for this easy to pull of strategy then I guess you're right.
I think, however, 2 bunker ramp block is detrimental to the game. It encourages gimmicky and games that end in 5 minutes. Most amateurs just want in for the quick win and this hurts their growth as players and interest in the game. If they fixed the 2 pylon block, I don't see why they wouldn't fix the 2 bunker block, considering it's basically the same thing (ends the game abruptly and there is barely any skill in pulling it off).
I can understand if Blizzard doesn't want to implement the GSL maps on ladder. I mean, they work in partnership with GOM but GOM has their own map designers and so does Blizzard. It's kind of a slap in the face to tBlizzard's own employees if they decide to use GSL maps instead of their own. But I think it's okay because it somewhat brings a sense of exclusiveness to the GSL; which is pretty cool. If you're pro enough to play in Korea, then you should get to play on these sick new/trendy maps.
|
Taldarim could turn into NR40.
Still, an improvement by and large.
|
Too many corridors, chockes and small ramps. It'll be a forcefield fest :/
I like the size of the maps. Good macro games incoming I believe. It's these kind of maps that will show how balance the game is and will help blizzard balance the game.
|
I am very excited for the new maps! It does seem like crossfire might be a bit zerg unfriendly though.
|
Time will tell how balanced they are, but I know I'm looking forward to some new maps and more macro-oriented games. I hope Blizzard's paying attention and begins adding larger maps to the ladder pool if these maps work well in the GSTL.
|
Really dislike the 6 min, 1 gas expansions as well as the gold no gas expansions on Crevasse. They're functionally rebalancing the midgame to favor mineral heavy compositions. I'm not saying it would necessarily be unbalanced, but it would be a different game (which is therefore unlikely to be well balanced).
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 02:16 JakeBurton wrote:
Really dislike the 6 min, 1 gas expansions as well as the gold no gas expansions on Crevasse. They're functionally rebalancing the midgame to favor mineral heavy compositions. I'm not saying it would necessarily be unbalanced, but it would be a different game (which is therefore unlikely to be well balanced).
I disagree,and like I said the 1 gas expo in Terminus is high yield gas that returns 6 gas per trip.and the mineral only gold expos don't really change anything,considering how unsafe it is to take them in the first place....
|
I wish they added Legacy Of The Void instead of Tal'Darim Altar. Best SC2 map I've played so far. Love it!
|
|
|
The first map looks really interesting i will look forward to see how the pros will adapt to the new maps.
|
On February 01 2011 02:16 JakeBurton wrote:
Really dislike the 6 min, 1 gas expansions as well as the gold no gas expansions on Crevasse. They're functionally rebalancing the midgame to favor mineral heavy compositions. I'm not saying it would necessarily be unbalanced, but it would be a different game (which is therefore unlikely to be well balanced).
Im with you on that, i know it worked in BW, but i can't see how zerg can compete in a heavy mineral army mid game, zerglins are the worst mineral dump of the three races, maybe with a big amount of them, banelings+surround could work :S
Anyways, now that we have gotten this new fancy maps, even if they are not that good in the end, its a change in the right direction, but now its time for pros to start asking blizzard to add this to the ladder, and maybe if the ESL maps from ICCup works well, they can add one or two! (Testbug looks amazing)
|
On February 01 2011 02:16 JakeBurton wrote:
Really dislike the 6 min, 1 gas expansions as well as the gold no gas expansions on Crevasse. They're functionally rebalancing the midgame to favor mineral heavy compositions. I'm not saying it would necessarily be unbalanced, but it would be a different game (which is therefore unlikely to be well balanced).
Well, we haven't seen any games on such maps yet, so any theorycrafting is speculation at best. Hopefully, all our questions about map balance will be answered once the pros start playing these maps in GSTL.
I think it is good to throw in a bit of "imbalance" and variety in there just to see how the game turns out. Perhaps it will be more balanced than we thought. Or not. It will certainly be fun to see how people adapt to these new situations. And if it turns out to be extremely imbalanced, it's quite easy for the mapmakers to just throw in an extra gas or two to calm the complaints, especially since they probably don't run on Blizzard time.
It's great to see the Korean mapmakers working hard to bring these new maps to SC2. They were the unsung heroes of BW, and I think it is about time they get recognition once we get some epic games on these maps.
|
Really happy to see them exploring new maps. As a zerg user I surely can't complain about these maps
What I'm curious to see is what the downvote map trend will be now (if there is one at all?).
|
On February 01 2011 02:23 ChemBroTron wrote: LOL That's funny!
|
United States7481 Posts
|
GOM is awesome and deserve our support, seriously, they keep trying to improve things every season, good stuff. Am I correct in assuming that these'll move straight into the regular league if everything goes well?
Really wish Blizzard would at least sync the changes to their official maps with the ladder pool though. I can understand them waiting to see how the new maps work out, but different versions of the official maps floating around can't be good. Plus they already fixed the pylon thing, should have done the bunker thing then tbh.
|
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
Oh this is cool, but at this rate it seems Blizzard will either lag behind in updating their maps for ladder or they won't follow Gom's at all 
Hm I'm wondering why only Metal, Xel naga and LT? Perhaps because Shakuras and Crossfire both have back entrances and you have a back natural expo on Crevass? And may be not only that but unlike Metal, Xel Naga, and LT, these maps don't have "close" positions?
|
|
|
Are these getting put in the ladder map pool? I hope so
|
On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd.
On February 01 2011 01:27 kgt wrote:
hey, it is not about how to defeat terran in these spot locations...
I was trying to said that terran`s play at this map should be much easier than zerg`s (in that locations).
zerg have to destroy the rocks to get a base which is harder to defend, than terrans 3rd.
also notice that some aggresion from terran can easily prevent from taking 3rd base by zerg... (siege tanks at higher ground in the middle of the map)
REALLY?! You're seriously already saying the spawn locations are potentially imbalanced... What about if the opposite happens and terran's third is now open to the Zerg's muta harass, and the Zerg's third is now almost untouchable unless you fly all the way around the map to drop it, or break right up into his base. Your little diagram is cute and all but I'm seriously fed up with this imbalanced notion everyone seems to be so fixed on. I could draw shapes and color bases with arrows to prove how on most every map that's ever been made there's a way that one race can potentially be in a better position given a certain style of play, and I could even begin to show you how your scenario is a problem of the player themselves and not an issue of "imbalances" in a map.
If you haven't caught my point, next time don't use the word imbalanced in your post if your curious how something like the spawn locations could potentially effect a game and maybe I'll take the time to draw you pictures and dotted lines, and we can have an intelligent coversation about the matter.
Edit: I'm extremely excited to see these maps implimented! I forsee some epic games coming from them.
|
Way to go GOM!!!
I think they realize that ANY changes are extremely welcome at this point, as something needed to be done before we had every semifinals being TvT. In case anyone hasn't noticed, there's been a crazy amount of terran success in every GSL. For example, the semi-final numbers for the past 4 seasons:
Season 1: TTTZ
Season 2: TTTZ
Season 3: TTPP
Season 4A: TTTT
Season 4S: TTTZ
GOM has noticed this and has taken steps to ensure better variety and more balanced games at the high-level, something that Blizzard doesn't seem to care about too much. Thank you GOM for taking the initiative, perhaps this is the splash-in-the-face that will get Blizzard to finally do something about all the horrible maps/versions of maps currently in the map pool. This is definitely a good day for competitive starcraft.
|
sc2vods.blip.tv for some games.
as you can see, terminus re uses a sunken neutral depot to block wallins at ramp. unsure about others.
|
Why did they just decide on 4 maps? The other maps they did not choose are way better than Scrap Station. Even Metalopolis and LT are pretty terrible compared to their other maps. GOM was testing 9 maps and they all look superior to those.
|
On February 01 2011 02:46 andrewlt wrote:
Why did they just decide on 4 maps? The other maps they did not choose are way better than Scrap Station. Even Metalopolis and LT are pretty terrible compared to their other maps. GOM was testing 9 maps and they all look superior to those.
Surely you realize there are other considerations besides map quality. Assuming they'll use these for next GSL and nost just GSTL, players will have little time to practice them, which might hurt the quality of games more than map imbalances. They also haven't really done that much testing and the testing didn't really involve top players actually putting time into coming up potentially unbalanced strategies specific to these maps. Also the fact they can't be played on ladder is an issue, which would obviously be even worse if almost none of the maps were practicable on ladder.
|
So extremely excited for this. Really hope that Blizzard takes a lesson from GOM and makes some changes.
|
|
|
On February 01 2011 02:44 rift wrote:
sc2vods.blip.tv for some games.
as you can see, terminus re uses a sunken neutral depot to block wallins at ramp. unsure about others.
Thank you! I can't wait to see some nice games on those maps!
and people, remember to make some noise on the official blizzard forums
theres a thread about this, lets post there and make our voices heard...
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1965574576
|
On January 31 2011 23:44 mierin wrote:
Hm, not sure how I like Terminus Re and Tal'Darim Altar...they just seem really big. 16 bases for a 1v1? In SC2, not sure how that's gonna pan out.
longer better games. that's how it'll pan out.
|
|
|
koreans sure like putting hexagons in the middle of their maps
|
Really nice maps, they are much larger with lots of ways to harass your opponent, with lots of close distance expansions. Really looking forward to next season!
|
seems like we're in for a treat with those new maps, they all look amazing
thanks GOM and lets hope blizzard jumps onto the bandwagen and puts those into ladderpool
|
Lets hear what the liquid players have to say about them 
|
On February 01 2011 03:16 alexpnd wrote:Lets hear what the liquid players have to say about them
I agree. Would love to hear what pros are saying about these maps
|
On February 01 2011 02:46 andrewlt wrote:
Why did they just decide on 4 maps? The other maps they did not choose are way better than Scrap Station. Even Metalopolis and LT are pretty terrible compared to their other maps. GOM was testing 9 maps and they all look superior to those.
Players still practice on ladder quite a lot. Until they work with Blizzard (hopefully Crossfire is added) they need some Blizz maps in their pool. Blizzard said they were working on their own maps, which concerns me greatly.
|
Crevasse is like super ez 4 base lol
|
finally someone did it
|
Terminus Re is just begging for banshee, muta, phoenix/void ray harass if you're counterclockwise one position from your opponent.
On the flip side, if you're a Terran and your opponent is counterclockwise, can siege tanks hit your opponents 1-gas 3rd? dear god that'd be annoying
|
GSL will be harder to those who doesn't have teams since they won't be able to practice just laddering.
I really like cross fire
Although a lot of chokes, mech play will be possibility but the map is big so you can abuse that
|
so excited to see these in use macro games will be so much longer and i'm sure the cheeses people come up with will be even crazier
|
I don't think the maps for GSL itself will change for at least another season or so to wait and see how GSTL turns out and also to see how Blizz will react in ladder (though I doubt they will do anything except maybe add crossfire as the sub for basin).
|
Triple expand before barracks? I think so.
|
|
|
Look forward to anyone playing against zerg to vito Tal'Darim Altar. That map is so muta-ling that it makes my cringe.
|
Macro games here we come!
|
Oh god. TvT is going to be ridiculous on these maps. 45 minutes games goooo! Actually I'm kind of excited.
|
On February 01 2011 02:39 ihavetofartosis wrote:
Way to go GOM!!!
I think they realize that ANY changes are extremely welcome at this point, as something needed to be done before we had every semifinals being TvT. In case anyone hasn't noticed, there's been a crazy amount of terran success in every GSL. For example, the semi-final numbers for the past 4 seasons:
Season 1: TTTZ
Season 2: TTTZ
Season 3: TTPP
Season 4A: TTTT
Season 4S: TTTZ
GOM has noticed this and has taken steps to ensure better variety and more balanced games at the high-level, something that Blizzard doesn't seem to care about too much. Thank you GOM for taking the initiative, perhaps this is the splash-in-the-face that will get Blizzard to finally do something about all the horrible maps/versions of maps currently in the map pool. This is definitely a good day for competitive starcraft.
15 terran, 3 zerg, 2 protoss... hmm...
This line left intentionally blank.
|
Oh man now lets hope Blizzards smart and adds these to the ladder pool :D.
Also awesome that GOM made it possible to not double bunker block on Lt/Meta/xelnaga .
|
wow Terminus Re, not a fan of this map.....3 free bases? the terran can easily wall in and get 3 free bases as well, did they not think about that
|
Like these maps. Glad for a change more than the maps themselves. But I'm excited.
|
On February 01 2011 03:53 blade55555 wrote:Oh man now lets hope Blizzards smart and adds these to the ladder pool :D. Also awesome that GOM made it possible to not double bunker block on Lt/Meta/xelnaga .
Let's hope Blizzard's smart and watches these maps closely when determining how to make new maps.
|
I am very very please with the new maps. Thank you GOM!
Finally the games should be longer than 10 minutes now...
|
I always liked the fact that GomTV matches and SC2 in general is very fast paced. Creating large maps that favor macro play will make it less entertaining to watch.
|
On February 01 2011 03:30 PartyBiscuit wrote:
I don't think the maps for GSL itself will change for at least another season or so to wait and see how GSTL turns out and also to see how Blizz will react in ladder (though I doubt they will do anything except maybe add crossfire as the sub for basin).
Thing is next season of GSL starts in march, and from how I understood it the first season of GSTL will be over by then. After GSTL gom will come to some sort of conclusion on wether or not to include them in the GSL. So next month we'll see.
|
On February 01 2011 04:05 FarbrorAbavna wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 03:30 PartyBiscuit wrote:
I don't think the maps for GSL itself will change for at least another season or so to wait and see how GSTL turns out and also to see how Blizz will react in ladder (though I doubt they will do anything except maybe add crossfire as the sub for basin). Thing is next season of GSL starts in march, and from how I understood it the first season of GSTL will be over by then. After GSTL gom will come to some sort of conclusion on wether or not to include them in the GSL. So next month we'll see.
"March GSL" actually only ends in March and in fact begins Feb 14th. GSTL is a week earlier and takes only 4 days. Considering GSL map pool has to pretty much be announced earlier than that, they've to decide whether they want to use these maps before GSTL.
|
Looks like GSL wants to favor some Macro late game with some of the maps. I see a lot of 3 base play coming
|
Dear Idra, what do you think of these maps and Zerg's chances on it?
|
On February 01 2011 01:51 Veldril wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps. I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies.
That is some incredibly terrible logic. wow.
The only thing blocking a ramp does is hurt zerg and decrease the already low number of strategies zerg can do. Terran walling off with bunkers is far from a strategy that needs to be preserved.
|
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Blocking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
THANK YOU GOM
would very much like to see the possibility of close spawn positions to also be removed, but removing the ability to block a ramp with 2 ramps is a very nice move to make for spectating quality. non-blocking offensive bunkers (in very early game) are already obnoxious enough.
|
Very excited to see this in action.
|
I haven't played on Tal'Darim, but unless I'm looking at the map wrong, it seems like you can take 3 bases uncontested while defending just one ramp. As a Zerg, that kind of...gives me pause.
On the other hand, I'm sure macro Terrans like Jinro are salivating.
EDIT: Actually, little known fact - I'm blind. Didn't see the second flat ground entrance into those 3-base sections.
|
Is there a direct download link somewhere?
|
I am glad the new maps are here. Crevasse seems to have an easy third and quite a few chokes... I am eager to see how that will turn out.
Crossfire SE looks familiar... Peaks of Baekdu?
Tal'darim Altar will have some massive macro battles. Looking forward to how that map changes the game.
|
So there's no way that Gom could implement something that prevents close position spawns? The change regarding the double bunkers is all good, but I'd prefer they just remove close position spawns on LT and Meta entirely.
|
On February 01 2011 04:18 nirajax wrote:
Is there a direct download link somewhere?
All those maps are playble on EU NA KR SEA servers. Use search feature.
|
I can't wait to play on terminus. Lol I have 3 bases with one choke :D. Yay for Terran!
|
Cannot wait to see even more macro games, great job with the maps GSL!
|
On January 31 2011 23:49 MrCon wrote:
I saw some excellent TvZ on Terminus, really pumped about this.
Taldarim is gigantic >< And what's the point of putting rocks in all expansions, it prevents fast double or triple expand, why would you make a 1v1 map with a 4v4 player size if you put rocks everywhere ?
so the lategame will remain agressive instead of 200v200 camp like for example on metalopolis when everything's mined out.
|
On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:Show nested quote +
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
Actually Fruitdealer is the one who was complaining for the korean scene
|
Will this new map pool also be used for the non-team GSL?
|
Oh man, these maps are so hot! Can't wait for GSTL to start!!!
|
This is so awesome, I can only hope that these maps end up in the official ladder pool as well, otherwise I'll be pretty sad.
No bunker blocks either, Zerg might have themselves a parade.
|
On February 01 2011 04:20 Accidentus wrote:
So there's no way that Gom could implement something that prevents close position spawns? The change regarding the double bunkers is all good, but I'd prefer they just remove close position spawns on LT and Meta entirely.
Honestly I think Zerg just got handed a pretty good deal...if LT and Meta are the worst maps (possibly) for us, I think there'll be a lot fewer balance arguments in the near future
|
maybe zerg players will achieve what they deserve now
would be huge to see good players in the later stages of gsl
|
On January 31 2011 23:44 insaneMicro wrote:
Looking nice, I do have my doubts about crossfire though, so many chokes. Still better than Jungle Basin, looks like you can actually flank there.
Also, I might be wrong here, but isnt that basically Peaks of Baekdu(sp)?
yup, it's a blizzard remake of the map
|
We will see a lot of proxy rax and gates with these maps
|
On February 01 2011 02:38 Ameba-AZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd. Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:27 kgt wrote:
hey, it is not about how to defeat terran in these spot locations...
I was trying to said that terran`s play at this map should be much easier than zerg`s (in that locations).
zerg have to destroy the rocks to get a base which is harder to defend, than terrans 3rd.
also notice that some aggresion from terran can easily prevent from taking 3rd base by zerg... (siege tanks at higher ground in the middle of the map) REALLY?! You're seriously already saying the spawn locations are potentially imbalanced... What about if the opposite happens and terran's third is now open to the Zerg's muta harass, and the Zerg's third is now almost untouchable unless you fly all the way around the map to drop it, or break right up into his base. Your little diagram is cute and all but I'm seriously fed up with this imbalanced notion everyone seems to be so fixed on. I could draw shapes and color bases with arrows to prove how on most every map that's ever been made there's a way that one race can potentially be in a better position given a certain style of play, and I could even begin to show you how your scenario is a problem of the player themselves and not an issue of "imbalances" in a map. If you haven't caught my point, next time don't use the word imbalanced in your post if your curious how something like the spawn locations could potentially effect a game and maybe I'll take the time to draw you pictures and dotted lines, and we can have an intelligent coversation about the matter. Edit: I'm extremely excited to see these maps implimented! I forsee some epic games coming from them.
i think that spaw locations effect the game style we play.
What about metalopolis? do you play everytime the same style, builds etc no matter where is your opponent location? (against the same race).
if the opposite locations happens terrans can play their normal game style, while getting 3rd they can easily defend it at this point of game... (marines+stim) (against muta harras and drops)...
It will change after Zerg get broodlords... I think that siege tanks makes a difference in such spawn locations... cutting a little terrain at this map would make it more balanced.
|
I think those maps are somewhat too similar, and they just look strange to me.
But, I can't knock 'em until I try 'em, so time will tell.
|
Oh man, can't wait for next season of GSL. :D I've played Tal'Darim Altar a few times, it's a great map, even if the centre feels uncomfortably open for me as a Terran player.
|
any change is good
now GOM can see how these maps will play out and make any necessary adjustments to these maps or new maps
within a few seasons, the quality of games should increase at a much faster rate than they are now
|
On January 31 2011 23:39 tok wrote:
These maps give me tinkly feelings down under.
What, you mean like in Australia? :-p
|
hooray for small ass garbage maps kickin' the can. Hopefully Blizzard makes effort in the next expansion pack to balance the game towards a more 'macro' middle game as opposed to the balancing efforts made in beta on 'micro' maps.
You remember in BW the tiny 8 player micro maps where you got no space at all? I s'posed that would be the micro : macro dichotomy I'm suggesting.
|
Crevass looks like a fair map, probably the best of the pool there.
Crossfire... Siege tanks at the tower = lol i got the whole ground entrance covered.
Terminus RE looks like a Delta Quadrant remake, but for the better. Which makes sense as that map is removed.
Tal Darim Altar looks quite zerg favored. Which is a good chance for once.
|
Crossfire looks like A HUGE macro map.
|
wow Idra's Metalopolis "silent" protest really made an impact. Cant wait to see GSL on the new maps
|
So since Blizzard is sponsoring the GSL can we expect these maps to show up on the ladder?
If not, then I wonder if this won't hurt players like IdrA who don't have large teams to practice with. Granted he could practice with some of his EG teammates, but the one's that aren't in Korea wouldn't really have any incentive to learn the maps.
|
Awesome maps. Terminus looks best to me. Is it just me or is Tal'Darim Altar huuuuuuge? We'll see how that plays out...
|
I watched the OSL yesterday, and some games from the new maps today. The back-and-forth that I knew from SC:BW is back. An all-in will most likely fail due to the defenders advantage and counter attacks are very much viable without it being a base trade. Players reaching 3-4-5 bases should be quite possible and we will probably see more end-game units like the Mothership used.
I am really looking forwards to games on the new maps.
|
Adding customs maps is gonna make practising alot harder for the players.
It's good though, as I think many are getting sick of the same maps over and over again.
Personally I have a feeling big maps are gonna be protoss favoured, as the warp in allows instant reinforcement, whereas every other race has to rally cross map.
Terran will probably have the hardest time, as from what I've seen their end game is pretty weak. Guess battlecruisers arn't used enough though :p
|
"Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible."
This should be the case for all maps, come on Blizzard T.T
|
On February 01 2011 05:55 Fighter wrote:
So since Blizzard is sponsoring the GSL can we expect these maps to show up on the ladder?
If not, then I wonder if this won't hurt players like IdrA who don't have large teams to practice with. Granted he could practice with some of his EG teammates, but the one's that aren't in Korea wouldn't really have any incentive to learn the maps.
Well chat channels should hopefully help with that...'GSL maps Master Level' or something
|
Tal'darim: Yes, it's huge as hell with a pretty good 3rd, but its size could be its undoing, there's like 90 places to proxy and it's obscenely hard to check them all.
|
3 out of the 4 maps are rotationally symmetric, so there will be positional advantages. Whhyyy?
I guess it's kinda cool. That wasn't really Delta Quandrant's main problem anyhow. These are big enough that it won't be as large a factor.
They do look awfully cool and big and macro-y. It will be exciting to see how match-ups develop, and to see who will be the quickest to bust out the new stuff.
|
Holy crap that last map is like... SC2 version of Andromeda. I love it :D
|
These are very good maps!! :D I like them a lot they impulse macro games (YES!!!) and they just look cool great job Gom!!
|
They should also modify Lost Temple and Metalopolis by making it impossible that players spawn in close ground positions, just like it is the case with Shakuras. Otherwise success on these mapes will still be largely dependent on luck.
|
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
Looks like IdrA made a hell of a statement last GSL, but I'm sure that's not the only reason. GOM obviously has a lot of zerg player input, so when they saw what happened with IdrA it was a considerable deal to them.
|
Does anyone else see the resemblance between Crossfire SE and Sin Peaks of Baekdu?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WoWfk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/6_Sin%20Peaks%20of%20Baekdu.jpg)
Actually have a hard time seeing any differences at all. Sin Peaks of Baekdu was a great map though so will probably be nice Hope they copy Hitchhiker, Neo Arkanoid, Monty Hall and other great maps from that era
|
|
|
On February 01 2011 05:55 Fighter wrote:
So since Blizzard is sponsoring the GSL can we expect these maps to show up on the ladder?
If not, then I wonder if this won't hurt players like IdrA who don't have large teams to practice with. Granted he could practice with some of his EG teammates, but the one's that aren't in Korea wouldn't really have any incentive to learn the maps.
If I remember right, someone in a December "State of the Game" said that they'd actually talked to Blizzard about getting competition maps on Ladder. Blizzard's position was that it wasn't their job to do that on Ladder and that players can explore these maps through custom games.
That's a pretty bad position, IMO.
|
Thank God jungle basin was taken out.
|
I think this will be really interesting to watch. I cant wait to see how it pans out!
|
Personally I think Crossfire will be really interesting, it has a rather unique layout.
|
|
|
I think GOM made a good decision in trying these out first for the team league.
|
just logged in to say
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
and... blizzard, do it!
|
These maps look really, really, REALLY good.
|
all maps look good except tal darim, that map is wayyyy to big with way to many expos and places to proxy
|
On February 01 2011 07:04 Smackzilla wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 05:55 Fighter wrote:
So since Blizzard is sponsoring the GSL can we expect these maps to show up on the ladder?
If not, then I wonder if this won't hurt players like IdrA who don't have large teams to practice with. Granted he could practice with some of his EG teammates, but the one's that aren't in Korea wouldn't really have any incentive to learn the maps. If I remember right, someone in a December "State of the Game" said that they'd actually talked to Blizzard about getting competition maps on Ladder. Blizzard's position was that it wasn't their job to do that on Ladder and that players can explore these maps through custom games. That's a pretty bad position, IMO.
I think youre wrong here. You could be talking about something different, but i just yesterday listened to a state of the game podcast where (i think) kennigit said he talked to blizz about new maps for competitions and the only statement was that blizz is supportive bout custom maps for tournaments.
|
wow. crossfire seems HUGE!
|
Japan2283 Posts
I played those maps with my friends when they were testing it out. Really fun maps! A definite improvement from the junk we had before
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
Hell yeah! No more of this stupid cheesecake
I hope they change the ladder in the same way!
|
The last one seems like a good map to abuse reapers!
|
Isn't rotational symmetry the BEST!
Can't wait to see Tastetosis comment about the rotational symmetry like they love to do.
|
Really would've liked seing the symmetry being fixed on the current maps, before getting any new ones. It has been know for a while, since months ago people have used all sort of techniques to analyse the maps, so I cannot phantom as to why that doesn't just get repaired.
Anyway, all in all the new maps are gonna be a step in the right direction. But I feel we are gonna be embarking on a tumultuous journey with a lot of map changing and rotating once it gets started. Reasons being the map community probably sparks up a bit more and will get taken a more serious interest in. Development of the impact of features of maps on the gameplay.
Aswell as seeing crossfire removed after the first season. I'm no psychic but it's filled with corridors and extremely narrow pathways, it just spells disaster and hurts to look at. Army funneling, desert oasis antics, extremely powerful chokepoints, alternative routes that take two times longer to travel. It's gonna be interesting and fun to see,though so lets just say I'm very scared of this map and don't understand how it's supposed to work out.
Also I'm relieved that Biohazard II didn't make it. I thought it was an amateuristic map, created without any goal. So that does give me hope that the maps that are picked, aren't complete garbage. I apologize if I appear radical in the above, but change can be scary.
What I'm looking forward to seeing would be the experimenting with the map features. Things like wide/narrow naturals and chokes, pathways vs open space, 2, 3 or 4 player layouts, symmetry, top-right/bottom left or top-left/bottom right, "shielded" or open expos, linear expanding, rush distances, ramp orientation, focus on a route through the middle or with emphasis on flanks and so on and so forth. I really hope some concrete understanding can be developed from critically analysing things like that. In order to be able to use them in the future when a certain set of building block is desired for the creation of a new competitive map. As it is, with the map pool being static, I feel very little has been done with those types of things, because it wouldn't be able to be put to use anyway.
|
At least we wont be hearing those annoying zerg QQs anymore given that the new map pool includes larger macro maps.
Im expecting terrans to QQ to this
|
These maps are pretty terrible, especially for TvZ. Mutalisks + Creep = Every single map on the pool is zerg favoured, and some are ridiculously zerg favoured.
Some maps should be small for variety, so that people can't play the same on every single map - which is precisely what Blizzard was going for.
But this is just stupid. How are terrans supposed to push against either zerg or protoss on such massive ground distances?
|
On February 01 2011 07:37 thegamer wrote:
At least we wont be hearing those annoying zerg QQs anymore given that the new map pool includes larger macro maps.
Im expecting terrans to QQ to this
The only terrans that will QQ are the ones who still don't' know how to macro. If anybody is watching the vods of games by top koreans playing on these maps terrans are winning as much as zerg so these aren't "zerg" favored as the poster above me thinks lolol.
|
On February 01 2011 07:44 blade55555 wrote:
The only terrans that will QQ are the ones who still don't' know how to macro. If anybody is watching the vods of games by top koreans playing on these maps terrans are winning as much as zerg so these aren't "zerg" favored as the poster above me thinks lolol.
I love macro, but the only way to macro against zerg is to constantly push on them, otherwise mutalisks will not let you take any expos. But if pushing is significantly more difficult due to longer ground distances, then what?
If you have any TvZ or TvP vods on these maps, I would love to see them.
|
Waiting for blizzard to put em into ladder mappool.
|
Soooo happy. I have renewed hope for this game ^^
|
On February 01 2011 07:42 Starcraftmazter wrote:
These maps are pretty terrible, especially for TvZ. Mutalisks + Creep = Every single map on the pool is zerg favoured, and some are ridiculously zerg favoured.
Some maps should be small for variety, so that people can't play the same on every single map - which is precisely what Blizzard was going for.
But this is just stupid. How are terrans supposed to push against either zerg or protoss on such massive ground distances?
just like terran does in sc1. By taking more than 2 bases, expanding aggressively towards opponent and other equally crazy strategies.
|
On February 01 2011 07:42 Starcraftmazter wrote:
These maps are pretty terrible, especially for TvZ. Mutalisks + Creep = Every single map on the pool is zerg favoured, and some are ridiculously zerg favoured.
Some maps should be small for variety, so that people can't play the same on every single map - which is precisely what Blizzard was going for.
But this is just stupid. How are terrans supposed to push against either zerg or protoss on such massive ground distances?
Yeah, too bad Phoenixes can really crush Mutalisks then. 
|
On February 01 2011 07:42 Starcraftmazter wrote:
These maps are pretty terrible, especially for TvZ. Mutalisks + Creep = Every single map on the pool is zerg favoured, and some are ridiculously zerg favoured.
Some maps should be small for variety, so that people can't play the same on every single map - which is precisely what Blizzard was going for.
But this is just stupid. How are terrans supposed to push against either zerg or protoss on such massive ground distances?
There are still small maps. All the ones that are left from the old pool are small. The difference is that now we don't have ONLY small maps, like what used to be the case. There is much more variety now. Before these maps, large maps had almost never been tried in 1v1, except maybe one or two maps in cross positions.
|
On February 01 2011 07:53 DrainX wrote:
There are still small maps. All the ones that are left from the old pool are small. The difference is that now we don't have ONLY small maps, like what used to be the case. There is much more variety now.
None of those maps are small, they are medium at best, most are large.
This new pool is pretty pointless for terran, god forbid Blizzard puts them in the ladder. The game is simply not balanced for such massive maps and ground distances.
May as well begin switching to zerg now.
|
On February 01 2011 07:55 Starcraftmazter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:53 DrainX wrote:
There are still small maps. All the ones that are left from the old pool are small. The difference is that now we don't have ONLY small maps, like what used to be the case. There is much more variety now. None of those maps are small, they are medium at best, most are large.
Scrap Station, Metalopolis, Lost Temple and Xel'Naga Caverns are all small/medium maps. Metalopolis and Lost temple on close positions is as small as it can possibly get. If it was any smaller it would be blood bath or paranoid android level of size.
|
It seems like crossfire makes a third base for zerg really difficult.
|
Id like to see tvz bio on these newer maps instead of the typical tank marine.
Im already bored of this strategy since it is so common.
|
On February 01 2011 07:56 DrainX wrote:
Scrap Station, Metalopolis, Lost Temple and Xel'Naga Caverns are all small/medium maps. Metalopolis and Lost temple on close positions is as small as it can possibly get.
Scrap, any positions on metal except close, any positions LT except close are very hard TvZ, and are highly zerg favoured already. Xel Naga is balanced, probably the best map in the pool.
On February 01 2011 07:58 thegamer wrote:
Id like to see tvz bio on these newer maps instead of the typical tank marine.
Im already bored of this strategy since it is so common.
That's because bio doesn't work against banelings without tanks...
|
On February 01 2011 07:42 Starcraftmazter wrote:
These maps are pretty terrible, especially for TvZ. Mutalisks + Creep = Every single map on the pool is zerg favoured, and some are ridiculously zerg favoured.
Some maps should be small for variety, so that people can't play the same on every single map - which is precisely what Blizzard was going for.
But this is just stupid. How are terrans supposed to push against either zerg or protoss on such massive ground distances?
You're basing balance off a picture of a map LAWL
Crossfire is the most imba map of these new maps (if you consider 40% ZvT imba) where as the other new maps are ~55% zerg favored over terran
|
On February 01 2011 08:02 Kazzabiss wrote:
You're basing balance off a picture of a map LAWL
Crossfire is the most imba map of these new maps (if you consider 40% ZvT imba) where as the other new maps are ~55% zerg favored over terran
What's wrong with that?? The picture of the map shows it doesn't it?
Crossfire looks like it has the longest ground distance of all. I'm sure no good zerg would have no trouble. You probably get like 2-3 minutes from when the terran moves out to what he gets to your base to make whatever preparations necessary.
|
very nice
i have to test these maps after my tests
|
On February 01 2011 08:05 Starcraftmazter wrote:
What's wrong with that?? The picture of the map shows it doesn't it?
Crossfire looks like it has the longest ground distance of all. I'm sure no good zerg would have no trouble. You probably get like 2-3 minutes from when the terran moves out to what he gets to your base to make whatever preparations necessary.
Considering the current state of TvZ, that sounds more than fair to me.
|
I like how you can hide your overlord in Terminus RE. :-)
Lol nice! Thanks for sharing haha :D
Hm I wonder if you could then also hide other units? Like stacked Mutas :D I hope they did consider this it would make sense why it says "operationen" or whatever with a caution sign next to it haha. Would be one of those little cool trinkets that can define the map
|
That's because bio doesn't work against banelings without tanks...
actually marauders rape banelings, just have to make sure to pull marines back or spread them
|
On February 01 2011 08:22 thegamer wrote:actually marauders rape banelings, just have to make sure to pull marines back or spread them
This and any response I give is useless theory-crafting. Simply put, it is necessary to have siege tank support in TvZ.
|
On February 01 2011 08:28 Starcraftmazter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 08:22 thegamer wrote:That's because bio doesn't work against banelings without tanks... actually marauders rape banelings, just have to make sure to pull marines back or spread them This and any response I give is useless theory-crafting. Simply put, it is necessary to have siege tank support in TvZ.
Yup... Im zerg player and Bio vs Zerg sucks.
Imo best build for TvZ is Mass Marines + tanks lol
|
On February 01 2011 Starcraftmazter wrote:
On February 01 2011 08:22 thegamer wrote:
Show nested quote +
That's because bio doesn't work against banelings without tanks...
actually marauders rape banelings, just have to make sure to pull marines back or spread them
This and any response I give is useless theory-crafting. Simply put, it is necessary to have siege tank support in TvZ.
Actually ur just uselessly theorycrafting generalizations that siege tanks are absolutely necessary. Bio is very viable in tvz and it is possible to go by without tanks.
Combinations of thors, hellions, marine marauder can counter zerg effectively and are much more mobile, which is favorable on larger maps
|
Crossfire is a zergs worst nightmare?
|
On February 01 2011 04:13 Bosu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:51 Veldril wrote:On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps. I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies. That is some incredibly terrible logic. wow. The only thing blocking a ramp does is hurt zerg and decrease the already low number of strategies zerg can do. Terran walling off with bunkers is far from a strategy that needs to be preserved.
It is terrible logic, but it is non the less the stance Blizzard have taken.
There is supposed to be maps where you can cliff drop above a natural.
There is supposed to be maps where the by far most effective strategy is simply to rush.
There is supposed to be maps where units can warped into the back of your base.
There is supposed to be maps that encourage macro games.
In their own words Blizzard is trying to give users "a variety of experiences". I wouldn't be suprised if getting walled off with bunkers is one of those "experiences".
|
Yes! Can't wait for to see games on these maps. Hopefully Blizzard will consider adding maps like these to the ladder if they turn out to be good.
|
I'll wait to see how the maps play to judge them, but I'm not too excited, other than Crossfire. Crevasse with it's free expansion doesn't seem too interesting, Terminus looks like it's gonna see a lot of three base, and... I dunno about Tal'Darim Altar.
I want bigger maps, I'm just not sure I'm excited by these maps.
|
good bye 2 rax rushes..we wont miss you...besides maybe lost temple and xel naga
|
Now I want to see the map pools of other tournaments being updated.
|
Aww no Aiur Garden? Ok I guess that map was TOO big.
|
No more 2 bunkers blocking a ramp? That's a really interesting decision. I guess Gom wants to force people to play better games and just remove Blizzard from the equation.
|
One thing is for sure, we will see more nydus on these maps.
|
Should be a good change. I'm wondering if we'll see any Boxer dropship micro on these effing huge maps. I mean, he'll probably 1 base himself to death but it should be fun to watch.
|
On February 01 2011 07:58 Starcraftmazter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:56 DrainX wrote:
Scrap Station, Metalopolis, Lost Temple and Xel'Naga Caverns are all small/medium maps. Metalopolis and Lost temple on close positions is as small as it can possibly get. Scrap, any positions on metal except close, any positions LT except close are very hard TvZ, and are highly zerg favoured already. Xel Naga is balanced, probably the best map in the pool.
Uh... what? Metal and LT are pretty decent for TvZ in any position. The only one that can potentially get annoying is Scrap, assuming the Zerg abuses mutalisks and the middle lane to keep Terran from getting a third.
|
On February 01 2011 09:12 Stuv wrote:
One thing is for sure, we will see more nydus on these maps.
NEVER.
Maybe nydus from Zerg base to second zerg's base, but never as an offensive logic. It's too expensive to try something like that.
|
On February 01 2011 09:05 tsuxiit wrote:
No more 2 bunkers blocking a ramp? That's a really interesting decision. I guess Gom wants to force people to play better games and just remove Blizzard from the equation.
I'm thankful for GOM's decision, simply because I've gotten tired of Zergs crying because they didn't have a drone patrolling the ramp. Can't really blame a Terran for going with it if it will help provide a win (see: Liquid'Jinro vs. EGIdrA), so the real answer is to just make it impossible to do in the first place.
|
This is awesome news, hopefully these maps will be implemented into our ladder map pool
|
no more steppes of war!! prepare for awesomeness!!
|
Awww I really liked Aiur Garden to play on thou
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 01 2011 02:06 Inflexion wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:51 Veldril wrote:On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps. I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies. I'm genuinely curious. How does a big tournament NOT translate to the ladder game (not needed in ladder)? Iono about you but when I play, I strive to play to the best of my ability, whether it be in a friendly pickup game or the GSL finals. When pro's are complaining about something fundamnetally and strategically imbalanced (for lack of a better word) AND their complaints are answered then why wouldn't it apply to ladder? What 'variety' of strategies are you talking about? If you're talking about an auto-win for most Terrans for this easy to pull of strategy then I guess you're right. I think, however, 2 bunker ramp block is detrimental to the game. It encourages gimmicky and games that end in 5 minutes. Most amateurs just want in for the quick win and this hurts their growth as players and interest in the game. If they fixed the 2 pylon block, I don't see why they wouldn't fix the 2 bunker block, considering it's basically the same thing (ends the game abruptly and there is barely any skill in pulling it off). I can understand if Blizzard doesn't want to implement the GSL maps on ladder. I mean, they work in partnership with GOM but GOM has their own map designers and so does Blizzard. It's kind of a slap in the face to tBlizzard's own employees if they decide to use GSL maps instead of their own. But I think it's okay because it somewhat brings a sense of exclusiveness to the GSL; which is pretty cool. If you're pro enough to play in Korea, then you should get to play on these sick new/trendy maps.
Its not a slap in the face if you add the maps in addition.
|
Other than the lack of Aiur Garden, (Though it was probably too big) I'm quite satisfied with that pool. I tried Crevasse and I enjoyed it quite a bit. It encourages macro games and the space in both expansions allow you to spread your tech out quite well.
|
This is a huge step in the right direction. As a BW fan, one of my biggest problems watching SC2 games was how tiny the maps were. With maps like these, i might actually be interested in watching the game. My only worry is that if Blizzard doesn't move toward balancing the game around larger maps problems could emerge.
|
Well, I feel stupid. Here I thought 'Team League' meant we were going to see world class 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 players.
Brood War style proleague team vs. team matches will almost certainly be better than what I was envisioning, but I was still very curious to see how a 'real' eSport federation like GOM would implement Team play.
|
What is going to happen, is that Zerg will start taking some matches, and then, Terran will adjust. Just like before, when nobody though Terran could macro with Zerg, that Banelings were OP, and all that noise.
Eventually, Terran (and hopefully Toss) will figure out the correct positioning, timings, harassment strats, and start winning again, and making things even.
Then, Zerg will QQ about the maps again...:
Oh, too many chokes, not enough chokes.....
Terran imba on the high ground, too many cliffs.
Mutas are too slow for these large maps...
And on and on it will go.
|
This is the best thing for sc2 as an esport.
|
Man... that 3rd map looks huge. I wonder how effective a fast 3rd would be on that map since it seems like it doesn't seem that hard to defend a 3rd. I'd expect some crazy play from Nestea and IdrA.
|
Wow! Can't wait to see how these maps pan out.
It's really obvious to see that Gretech wants matches to be longer more macro games to attract more viewers and stop those quick 5-10 minute games (although I do feel that these games are occasionally more exciting, but yes they do need to stop from being so frequent >.<)
I hope that when we see these maps played by the pros that we see just amazing games!
|
Personally, I'm lovin' this. I'd have liked to see Match Point as well, but meh.
|
|
|
On February 01 2011 05:02 kgt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 02:38 Ameba-AZ wrote:On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd. On February 01 2011 01:27 kgt wrote:
hey, it is not about how to defeat terran in these spot locations...
I was trying to said that terran`s play at this map should be much easier than zerg`s (in that locations).
zerg have to destroy the rocks to get a base which is harder to defend, than terrans 3rd.
also notice that some aggresion from terran can easily prevent from taking 3rd base by zerg... (siege tanks at higher ground in the middle of the map) REALLY?! You're seriously already saying the spawn locations are potentially imbalanced... What about if the opposite happens and terran's third is now open to the Zerg's muta harass, and the Zerg's third is now almost untouchable unless you fly all the way around the map to drop it, or break right up into his base. Your little diagram is cute and all but I'm seriously fed up with this imbalanced notion everyone seems to be so fixed on. I could draw shapes and color bases with arrows to prove how on most every map that's ever been made there's a way that one race can potentially be in a better position given a certain style of play, and I could even begin to show you how your scenario is a problem of the player themselves and not an issue of "imbalances" in a map. If you haven't caught my point, next time don't use the word imbalanced in your post if your curious how something like the spawn locations could potentially effect a game and maybe I'll take the time to draw you pictures and dotted lines, and we can have an intelligent coversation about the matter. Edit: I'm extremely excited to see these maps implimented! I forsee some epic games coming from them. i think that spaw locations effect the game style we play. What about metalopolis? do you play everytime the same style, builds etc no matter where is your opponent location? (against the same race). if the opposite locations happens terrans can play their normal game style, while getting 3rd they can easily defend it at this point of game... (marines+stim) (against muta harras and drops)... It will change after Zerg get broodlords... I think that siege tanks makes a difference in such spawn locations... cutting a little terrain at this map would make it more balanced.
So you pretty much just summed up the fact that using imbalance in your original argument was not a good choice. Do spawn locations change people's style's DUH! But because you don't get to play your own personal style that means that a map is imbalanced... COME ON... Get over the preconceived notion you [appear to] have that everything that doesn't seem to be perfectly fair at first glance is imbalanced.
|
Wait, I thought this was already announced a few days ago? Here's to hoping these get added to the ladder.
|
On February 01 2011 10:06 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 02:06 Inflexion wrote:On February 01 2011 01:51 Veldril wrote:On February 01 2011 01:44 SiN_br wrote:
The fact that they fixed the bunker thing by themselves speaks volumes as to how much blizzard is slow and idiotic about fixing things.
Way to go GSL peeps. I really don't think Blizzard would want to fix the blocking ramps with 2 bunkers. The inability to easily block ramps is needed in the big tournament. But for the ladder game, it would kill a variety of strategies. I'm genuinely curious. How does a big tournament NOT translate to the ladder game (not needed in ladder)? Iono about you but when I play, I strive to play to the best of my ability, whether it be in a friendly pickup game or the GSL finals. When pro's are complaining about something fundamnetally and strategically imbalanced (for lack of a better word) AND their complaints are answered then why wouldn't it apply to ladder? What 'variety' of strategies are you talking about? If you're talking about an auto-win for most Terrans for this easy to pull of strategy then I guess you're right. I think, however, 2 bunker ramp block is detrimental to the game. It encourages gimmicky and games that end in 5 minutes. Most amateurs just want in for the quick win and this hurts their growth as players and interest in the game. If they fixed the 2 pylon block, I don't see why they wouldn't fix the 2 bunker block, considering it's basically the same thing (ends the game abruptly and there is barely any skill in pulling it off). I can understand if Blizzard doesn't want to implement the GSL maps on ladder. I mean, they work in partnership with GOM but GOM has their own map designers and so does Blizzard. It's kind of a slap in the face to tBlizzard's own employees if they decide to use GSL maps instead of their own. But I think it's okay because it somewhat brings a sense of exclusiveness to the GSL; which is pretty cool. If you're pro enough to play in Korea, then you should get to play on these sick new/trendy maps. Its not a slap in the face if you add the maps in addition.
What do you think of these new maps? I think a few people here would like to know some pro player's opinions on these.
|
Thank you, GOM! Some variety to the map pool will be so refreshing!
|
Sweet cant wait to see the play styles on these maps!!
|
I've played on all of these maps, and I have to say, Crevasse is ridiculously friendly for FEs. It wouldn't surprise me if everybody made an expo at 14 supply on that map. It's so 2 base friendly.
Other than that, I just want to punch the guy who thought it was a good idea to put rocks at almost every goddamn expo in Tal'Darim Altar. It's a royal pain in the ass.
What happened to Aiur Gardens? That map seemed fun...
|
Nice to see some fresh maps!
|
Modification on Blizzard maps for the league
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Lost Temple for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers is no longer possible.
TY GOM. Blizzard you lazy bunch. [sarcasm]At least we know that 2 year from know Blizzard will finally fix this on ladder. lol.[/sarcasm]
|
While im not so sure about some of the elements of these maps and how they will play out in SC2, anything is better than the terrible maps weve been getting out of blizzard. I just hope some of them will start to be implemented on the ladder and in other tournaments. :D
|
Wowzers, these maps have a lot of expansions. I have a feeling some games are gonna get a lot longer. Lots of expansions for zergs, and lots of hills for siege tankage.
|
Yes to large maps and longer games! Hopefully the map is good for all races. Good job Gom.
|
This is so exciting, I mean honestly anything is better then the current map pool but these new maps look like they may exceed my expectations.
Gom Fighting!
|
damn this is great news. Can't wait to see what type of games we get with these maps. The modification for old maps is a great move as well.
|
Wow these maps looks great. Glad they aren't using steppes
Is it just me or crossfire kinda reminds me of destination (vaguely)?
Thanks GOM.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 12:14 TheDominator wrote:Wow these maps looks great. Glad they aren't using steppes Is it just me or crossfire kinda reminds me of destination (vaguely)? Thanks GOM.
Crossifre is a reamke of sin peaks of Baekdu
|
What is cool about these maps is that they all fit lore, which I personally feel is an important touch.
|
TDA has 20 mineral bases...such a difference from say the 12 on LT
|
Wow these maps looks great. Glad they aren't using steppes
Is it just me or crossfire kinda reminds me of destination (vaguely)?
Thanks GOM.
Vaguely, yes . But the "vague" part of it (the layout) is sort of a given considering how "standard" a map Destination was with its expansion paths and stuff.
Loving these new maps haha, if you actually look at it the rush distances aren't much longer, but of course any 10 second difference is great (and imo, enough). But when you look at the map at a whole it looks soooo much bigger xD
|
Is there any chance of uploading the modified LT/XelNaga/Metal maps that includes the ramp fix?
|
actually got around to playing a few of these maps. they are indeed pretty big at least in comparison to what I used too on the ladder. Some weird pathing also i felt. But overall nice maps, can def. see some epic games on them.
|
Will see what happen with these maps!
|
Wow Crossfire really is just like a backwards Destination, the expansions are in the exact same positions even down to destructible rocks for the expo connecting to the main and the middle even looks like its gunna have some fucked up pathing just like Destination (hated those goddamn bridges)
|
Can someone reimpose Terminus RE? Current version on NA only allows 4 people total
|
|
|
big maps= happy happy joy joy for our macro players!
I havent tried crossfire but then im sure it looks like you need air superiority for the high ground. I also smell tanks, lots of 'em.
|
Personally, I think this is a great thing. Especially the fixes to current maps. I think that too many people are saying "this will favor zerg" - while I'd rather say, this will favor someone, but without having seen high level play on the maps, I am not sure who.
I could see it favoring Terrans doing turtle to 4 bases then suiciding SCV's to get mass orbital's / mule mining and a bigger 200/200 army for example. Or enough spare minerals to put down enough turrets to be harass proof. Or maybe it won't happen that way at all, because of some other unforeseen things. Maybe Zerg will have an easier time getting 5+ bases and hit late tech (which really, is late - compared to the other races). Maybe ... something.
It is a good thing, because now we'll see whether or not maps have been imbalanced, or Terran have been.
|
I played some quick games against the AI on them tonight...
of course, a quick look doesn't mean much, no need to get into details until we see how pros play on them...
at first glance though I'd say that Crevasse, Terminus and Crossfire will be a lot of fun to play...
of course I could be well off, but crossfire should lead to some interesting air battles
as for crevasse and terminus, well, everybody's complaining that big maps favour Zerg, but I disagree, I play protoss and I ask for nothing more than a chance to get an easy, defendable expo
many pros always try to do forge FE against Zerg, on some of these maps it will be easier for us protoss to do a forge FE (as some did at the GSL on LT) and get a strong econ early....
protoss like me who love macro will love these maps, and they could also lead to some really sick 2-base timing pushes
cheesing protoss might not like them so much, but that's their problem, it will be great for good players, adn they will be good for macro players for every race
I don't like Tal Darim that much, everybody's saying that it's huge, but actualy it only looks huge, all the bases are pretty tiny, and if you spawn next to the opponent (top or bottom) rush distances are a lot shorter than they look..... it felt like my scouting probe got to the center of the map in no time
either way new maps will add to the fun, and new challenges, like adapting to different settings, will show which players are really the best (harder to just do the same cheese strat all the time)
excellent idea by GOM, let's hope Blizzard eventually adds some of these maps to the ladder
|
Is there any legitimate reason Scrap Station is still considered "a good map"?
|
It would be cool if close positions on metalopolis and Lost Temple, where not possible, like in shakuras plateau, that is be a necessary fix for those maps.
|
too bad no biohazard.. was my favorite of the bunch
|
Scrap Station offers something different because of the rush distances and the middle destructible rocks. Variety without obvious imbalance.
|
I'm quite disappointed with the choice. TerminusRe wth. To me, along with MerryGoRound, the worst candidate map.
Not sure why they haven't picked Maw of the Void ord Gettysburg. Had the most fun and interesting matches on those two. Pretty much all were good, exciting macro games. Shame shame.
Well at least we got rid of Steppes, Blistering and Delta.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 01 2011 15:35 Cep wrote:
I'm quite disappointed with the choice. TerminusRe wth. To me, along with MerryGoRound, the worst candidate map.
Not sure why they haven't picked Maw of the Void ord Gettysburg. Had the most fun and interesting matches on those two. Pretty much all were good, exciting macro games. Shame shame.
Well at least we got rid of Steppes, Blistering and Delta.
merry go round is very well balanced map...especially for a 3 player map.
Legacy of the Void and Gettysburg still need a lot of testing though....so they probably won't be added this season.
|
OH YEAH! Great to see this! So good!
That's certainly a step in the right direction. Good job GOM.
|
On February 01 2011 15:42 BLinD-RawR wrote:
merry go round is very well balanced map...especially for a 3 player map.
Legacy of the Void and Gettysburg still need a lot of testing though....so they probably won't be added this season.
Can't agree on that. Easy harassable gold mineral line from the middle platform. Also those watchtowers cover pretty much all attempts from ground armies to flank. So to me it's basicly a race for the middle and set up a contain. which favors terran too much imo.
|
Oh man this is going to be so sweet, I can't wait to see the players play on these new maps, oh that third expansion looks so great to take!
No more two base all-in's! Super excited for this next GSL.
|
On February 01 2011 15:01 Offhand wrote:
Is there any legitimate reason Scrap Station is still considered "a good map"?
Long rush distances allow for safer FEs, close air position lead to more airplay, which is generally lacking in most matchups, and the map is pretty balanced, with a slight tilt towards Zerg.
It's different and unique, but not imbalanced. Blizzard threw so many map gimmick darts, one had to hit, and that was Scrap. It's not perfect, but it's still pretty good, and I hope it gets remembered after it's eventually dropped from the metagame.
|
Glad to see we'll see something fresh in the future. All these maps look like as if to promote macro-style strategies and gameplay.
|
I hope these maps don't give us hourlong TvTs because of the size and number of terrans. We could be seeing turtlefests. I still think we need some matchup specific maps. Certain maps for ZvT and ZvP and TvP.
|
Now this is what's needed to rejuvenate the mildewing GSL. Large, big maps should at least give more time for macro, more time for comebacks, more harass. Can't wait to see matches done on these maps.
|
WHAAAAT???? where's my delta quadrant and jungle basin, those makes rock, the new maps are so much bigger, who wants to see hour long games in TvT???
|
In my opinion Crevasse is a great map, except for the gasless gold expansions. I mean, you have two nearby expansions with gas, but then you need to expand like on a complete other site, so I dislike this fact a lot.
But all in all, much better maps than shit like Steppes or Jungle^^
|
Ew. No sure about Crevasse. Too constricted in the middle. Imagine siege defense set up at watch towers. You HAVE to engage them. You can't even flank. Honestly, I think they should continue pumping out more map candidates until they find suitable ones.
The rest seem like good replacements. Just get rid of that retarded ledge on LT!
|
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.
|
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.
This could also mean they understand the terran race very well.
|
I'm not sure I like the idea of single gas expo's or no gas golds, I knew it would happen eventually, but I just don't see the need to play with things like that when the game is so new.
|
So now it takes 3 bunkers to set up a contain.
I don't see a problem.
I wonder if we are actually going to see early 2-SCV scouting on some of those maps.
As a terran, it will be nice to see new strats that will come with those.
|
GomTV your new map pool rocks!
|
Hooray for new maps! Man I would love to see these on the ladder too.
Also, Crevasse looks awesome.
|
kill those destructible rocks in blue expansions for god sake
|
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..
|
"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
|
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?
|
Russian Federation367 Posts
I miss biohazard - its really great, much better than Crevasse imho
|
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.
|
On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:Show nested quote +
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
hahahaha<3 YES
idra, zerg hero-prince ~
|
On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:Show nested quote +
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
quoted for fucking truth!
|
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?
|
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.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
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!
|
The third on Terminus is a half expansion...that is very very interesting
|
don't really like how close terminus' first 3 bases are. >>
|
Crevasse is a very interesting map. I've only played a single ZvP on there, but it should be exciting. No reason not to go 15 nex or 15 hatch IMO.
|
these new maps destroy ladder
i hope blizz will add them into the pool
|
Would love to see the exact same map change for the ladder really. Getting fed up with DQ, Steppes and what not.. I know you can veto them as I do but you still play them in tourneys and so on. Terrible maps really so its nice to see GSL going away from smaller/cheesier maps to bigger more fun maps imo.
|
On February 01 2011 21:42 Vei wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You. hahahaha<3 YES idra, zerg hero-prince ~
Sadly, I doubt this will affect the ladder maps. Hopefully we'll see less bunkers blocking ramps next season @_@
|
what sexy new maps Need them on ladder
|
On February 02 2011 00:01 Avaloch wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 21:42 Vei wrote:On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You. hahahaha<3 YES idra, zerg hero-prince ~ Sadly, I doubt this will affect the ladder maps. Hopefully we'll see less bunkers blocking ramps next season @_@
Wohoo! Let me guess then. A zerg will win next GSL?? :D
|
Honestly, I watch the Gisado stream at least once or twice a week, and I find those games to be more entertaining than GSL. Part of the beauty of an RTS is being able to play on different maps to give the game a different look and feel. Watching the Gisado stream the games feel like a different game at times. Also, I like the thought of high ranked amateurs playing each other for some reason... They like to put on an entertaining show. And also there isn't as much pressure with the lack of prize money involved, so it's not rare to see a bit more unorthodox strategies.
I'm so happy they will use these maps in the GSTL.
|
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder
|
Would love to play these maps on ladder, I hope blizzard would consider them throughly and put it up on the map pool they look great
|
I've played a bit of these maps in custom games and they were great, its unfortunate they aren't being considered for ladder.
|
Biohazard was awesome. Also I really don't like Tal'darim alter, I played a few games on it and felt cramped and confined the whole time.
But those minor complaints are nothing compared to the praise I have for them experimenting with custom maps, kudos.
|
These look uber sexy. Customs all day urv day.
|
|
|
As a Zerg, I nearly came at these maps. I only hope Terrans get their macro game on...I really hate one-sided series (FUUUUU stork and MKP) so I hope Zergs get a chance to shine without completely raping.
|
Actually think these maps are OP in favor of zerg and will cripple toss...but think in the long run that is a good thing as that will expose issues needing to be exposed to facilitate proper balancing from blizzard.
Love the idea of changing things up... Would be nice if Gom did this each month to keep the tourny's fresh.
Hopefully one of the SC casters reads this thread and does casts on these new maps ASAP.
|
On February 01 2011 07:21 Lowell wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:04 Smackzilla wrote:On February 01 2011 05:55 Fighter wrote:
So since Blizzard is sponsoring the GSL can we expect these maps to show up on the ladder?
If not, then I wonder if this won't hurt players like IdrA who don't have large teams to practice with. Granted he could practice with some of his EG teammates, but the one's that aren't in Korea wouldn't really have any incentive to learn the maps. If I remember right, someone in a December "State of the Game" said that they'd actually talked to Blizzard about getting competition maps on Ladder. Blizzard's position was that it wasn't their job to do that on Ladder and that players can explore these maps through custom games. That's a pretty bad position, IMO. I think youre wrong here. You could be talking about something different, but i just yesterday listened to a state of the game podcast where (i think) kennigit said he talked to blizz about new maps for competitions and the only statement was that blizz is supportive bout custom maps for tournaments.
I'm sure blizzard is happy that tournament maps are being made, but did blizzard say they would put tournament maps on the ladder?
|
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.
Considering the current lineup, I'd be more happy if they understood more of the Protoss and Zerg rather than the Terran. TvT is what I'm going to be concerned about - there's a risk of turtling. With the addition of Polt, there is now seventeen Terran in the lineup.
Either way - it's good to see the maps removed and those added. I wish Blizzard could learn from these guys...
On February 02 2011 03:51 Smackzilla wrote:
I'm sure blizzard is happy that tournament maps are being made, but did blizzard say they would put tournament maps on the ladder?
What Blizzard really is saying is no, they won't.
|
I don't keep up with SC2 at all, but damn it sure took them long enough to make some damn new maps. They're looking great too!
|
Germany44 Posts
players will veto them in the beginning anyway i think. But let's see how they'll turn out. Blizzard could use some of them on ladder maybe. We need new maps there aswell.
Nevertheless, will be awesome to see new strats on new (macro oriantated ?) maps
|
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.
I think your wrong. Watch the Gisado and terrans are doing just fine on these maps in tvz (don't watch tvp so no comment on that mu). Both are winning about equally and they are macro games not 1 base all ins or anything.
Terrans can do it just 90% of them dont' know how because they don't play for the longer game.
|
On February 02 2011 04:41 blade55555 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +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. I think your wrong. Watch the Gisado and terrans are doing just fine on these maps in tvz (don't watch tvp so no comment on that mu). Both are winning about equally and they are macro games not 1 base all ins or anything. Terrans can do it just 90% of them dont' know how because they don't play for the longer game.
As a macro-oriented Terran player, I have to agree with that. Comments saying things like "GOM doesn't understand Terran" or "e z Zerg wins" when the maps have been tested previously for balance -- and the people complaining haven't actually seen the general outcome on these maps in the different matchups -- are incredibly premature.
|
On February 02 2011 04:51 UruzuNine wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 04:41 blade55555 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +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. I think your wrong. Watch the Gisado and terrans are doing just fine on these maps in tvz (don't watch tvp so no comment on that mu). Both are winning about equally and they are macro games not 1 base all ins or anything. Terrans can do it just 90% of them dont' know how because they don't play for the longer game. As a macro-oriented Terran player, I have to agree with that. Comments saying things like "GOM doesn't understand Terran" or "e z Zerg wins" when the maps have been tested previously for balance -- and the people complaining haven't actually seen the general outcome on these maps in the different matchups -- are incredibly premature.
Yeah, its pretty funny to see people complaining about GOM not understanding the game, when all it does is highlight the fact that they themselves know very little
|
any channel dedicated to these maps? Been trying to find some in teamliquid channel but not much success.
I'll sit in channel gsl when I'm on.
|
Incoming 3 bunker blocks...
Aside from that, I think that these maps will bring strong Nydus Worm play.
|
If you search youtube for gisado you can find games on some of these new maps...of the ones I've watched they've tended to be very good.
Wish more casters would cover games with these new maps though...
|
On February 02 2011 01:05 Manimal_pro wrote:
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder
Tbh theres not an *actual* point to ladder, they could just as easily play custom games on the maps they like all day long, and it would even be better practice if they were planning to go pro since theyd be playing on the pro maps.
|
If none of those maps make their way into the ladder I could very well see a service like ICCup taking over SC2, too.
|
ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s
|
On February 02 2011 06:18 Disastorm wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 01:05 Manimal_pro wrote:
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder Tbh theres not an *actual* point to ladder, they could just as easily play custom games on the maps they like all day long, and it would even be better practice if they were planning to go pro since theyd be playing on the pro maps.
if these maps aren't being played on ladder then Idra really has no way to practice any matchup outside of ZvRet. I think Idra said something about GSL wanted the league to be open to everyone not jsut ppl with team so they might not use them in 1v1 league. But honestly i think the public outcry is so mucht hat they'll prob uses these for individual leagues as well.
|
Has Terminus RE on NA been fixed yet? When I tried yesterday we could only get 2 observers in =\
|
On February 02 2011 07:09 ffz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 06:18 Disastorm wrote:On February 02 2011 01:05 Manimal_pro wrote:
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder Tbh theres not an *actual* point to ladder, they could just as easily play custom games on the maps they like all day long, and it would even be better practice if they were planning to go pro since theyd be playing on the pro maps. if these maps aren't being played on ladder then Idra really has no way to practice any matchup outside of ZvRet. I think Idra said something about GSL wanted the league to be open to everyone not jsut ppl with team so they might not use them in 1v1 league. But honestly i think the public outcry is so mucht hat they'll prob uses these for individual leagues as well.
Idra is on team EG I imagine he should be able to get more practice partners than just Ret...
Anyway, using custom maps on GSL does not make it so just ppl on a team can get experience, since anyone can just play "custom game" instead of "ladder" on regular bnet to practice.
|
On February 02 2011 06:51 wessie wrote:
ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s
lol... Have you even looked at any of the non bw remakes?
I'm still praying that somehow these get put on ladder even though I know its like 0%
|
Is anybody else concerned that these maps may be too big? 16 bases seems like a lot to me, its certainly more than an average BW map (as I recall). I fully support the move towards macro games so I will keep my fingers crossed that this doesn't break the game in the opposite direction.
|
On February 02 2011 06:51 wessie wrote:
ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s
Your entitled to your opinion, but i really hate it. Those are great maps, and great effort went into them. They do not "suck".
|
ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s
Um actually please remember, ICCUP did NOT make those BW maps. They were all from Kespa (and possibly other sources), but Iccup did NOT have a mapmaking team.
So that is why it may seem BW maps were good and SC2 maps are bad; ICCUP simply wasn't involved with BW maps [much at all].
|
On February 02 2011 08:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s Um actually please remember, ICCUP did NOT make those BW maps. They were all from Kespa (and possibly other sources), but Iccup did NOT have a mapmaking team. So that is why it may seem BW maps were good and SC2 maps are bad; ICCUP simply wasn't involved with BW maps [much at all].
Oh ok. So ICCUP maps suck in sc2 period lol.
The good maps on ICCUP was from Kespa, so ICCUP is taking Kespa's credit for the maps.
|
|
|
Wow, these maps are really large, and quiet different.
We have a very intresting road ahead of us!
|
terminus re is such a good macro map......its just perfect <3
btw its a remake from a blizzard map called terminus......u can find it in the mappool (if someone didnt know it allready)
|
On January 31 2011 23:46 xza wrote:Show nested quote +
GomTV modified Metalopolis, Xel'Naga Caverns, Scrap Station for their league. Bloking the entrance with two bunkers are no longer possible.
Thank you idrA. Thank You.
Yes thank you IdrA indeed.
|
On February 02 2011 07:51 Velocirapture wrote:
Is anybody else concerned that these maps may be too big? 16 bases seems like a lot to me, its certainly more than an average BW map (as I recall). I fully support the move towards macro games so I will keep my fingers crossed that this doesn't break the game in the opposite direction.
I feel like bw had close to it I know fighting spirit had 13 bases (which is including the middle) so 3 more bases in this map compared to fighting spirit doesn't seem that big of a deal.
But only time will tell if its too many bases or if its good and of course not all the maps will have 16 bases ^^.
|
Those changes on Meta, LT and Xelnaga Caverns is fantastic news. Good job Gom!
|
Really hope Blizzard incorporates these maps into the ladder.
|
Ye blizz should definately incorporate these into the ladder.
Nothing is worse then the community being split, ie. some tourneys and ladder using 1 map pool while others use the 'pro' / bigger maps. It's terribly annoying to have GSL games on maps you never see on ladder and playing 'dead' maps on ladder feels stupid too. (even though we all know we are never going to get into high level tournaments)
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 02 2011 08:27 wessie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 08:20 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:ICCup maps suck lol... They were great in SC:BW but new maps that they doin to sc2 kinda suck;s Um actually please remember, ICCUP did NOT make those BW maps. They were all from Kespa (and possibly other sources), but Iccup did NOT have a mapmaking team. So that is why it may seem BW maps were good and SC2 maps are bad; ICCUP simply wasn't involved with BW maps [much at all]. Oh ok. So ICCUP maps suck in sc2 period lol. The good maps on ICCUP was from Kespa, so ICCUP is taking Kespa's credit for the maps.
although you are entitled to your opinion,I'm glad its not a fact.
and iCCup are not taking credit for Kespa maps they edit their data so that everygame played on the ladder with them get counted.
|
new maps :D just did a happy dance
( >")> <("< )
|
Man these look like some pretty descent maps
|
|
|
Is it just me or does crevasse look a bit like ICCup Fighting Spirit?
Tal'Darim Altar looks awesome though, Terminus Re does too.
Can't wait to play em on NA
|
Show nested quote +Oh ok. So ICCUP maps suck in sc2 period lol.
The good maps on ICCUP was from Kespa, so ICCUP is taking Kespa's credit for the maps. although you are entitled to your opinion,I'm glad its not a fact. and iCCup are not taking credit for Kespa maps they edit their data so that everygame played on the ladder with them get counted.
So yeah they were from Kespa, ICCUP used them for their league but they didn't "claim" they made the maps, they were just using them; it still said in the map descriptions, for example, the original creators/editors (the people that made up Kespa or contributed fan maps to Kespa).
|
Russian Federation798 Posts
We wont know if these maps are good or not until we see them in tournament play, who knows maybe these maps could be even worse than the ones they replaced.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
On February 02 2011 16:23 fishinguy wrote:
We wont know if these maps are good or not until we see them in tournament play, who knows maybe these maps could be even worse than the ones they replaced.
based on what I've seen so far on them.....no they will definitely do better,but I don't know much more from that point on.
|
Bummer I was hopping for a remake of Monty Hall lol.
But in all seriousness, these look MUCH better. I desperately hope they are added to the ladder soon.
|
Nice be interesting to see what happens with the change of maps, wil another race starting doing a lot better or not.
|
konadora
Singapore66145 Posts
crossfire SE looks almost exactly like peaks of baekdu :p
loving the changes!
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 02 2011 20:14 konadora wrote:
crossfire SE looks almost exactly like peaks of baekdu :p
loving the changes!
It IS peaks of baek du, it has been in the game since release tho (dunno why it wasnt a ladder map, but its a blizz remake of that map).
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
oh Hey FA!what do you think of the maps?
|
i have a question for you terrans out there who have tried these maps out . As a zerg player im very happy with those maps compared to the other maps in the pool but i actually find that as zerg its really easy to win in the lategame, especially on crevasse, simply because the terrans dont seem to be able to get a 4th up at all. If i manage to drag the game to that point of 3+ bases i think it is very easy to deny expansions, since terran is so spread out. Have you terrans had the same experience or is that just my point of view?
|
ditto to the above--these maps need to be in the ladder map pool. but in reality, there might be problems with some of these maps too since they haven't had as much play on them like the ladder maps have ... sc2 maps look so damn good that sometimes we get all worked up just for something new (perhaps because we have been served a pile of crap right now)
|
You know the cool thing about GOM controlling their own maps is that it can set the stage for phase 2 of SC2 improvement...and that is balance changes. The map editor is powerful enough that GOM can say...hey...Ultra's really need a buff...so we're going to give it to them. Say stim really needs a nerf? They can do this if they control the maps which is so awesome. No more waiting an eternity for David Kim to react to a well known imbalance, only to say make some obscure T3 unit get nerfed, while ignoring T1/T1.5 imbalances.
|
This might play to the disadvantage of players who practice primarily on ladder, since the maps won't be on ladder meaning that you won't be able to use ladder rankings to guarantee reasonable match-ups. The way Blizzard has setup BNET 2.0 is relatively unfriendly to the kind of map/rank advertisements that we saw on ICCUP, since all you get from the Custom Maps interface is the map name as opposed to any information about the host and purpose.
Honestly, the way I see it, Blizzard has gone to great lengths to prevent exactly this sort of independent ladder system. Given that they are working with Gretech, however, I assume they've approved this despite it contradicting what appeared to be their original design goals for competitive SC 2 (ie Blizzard in control of the scene). I wonder about the potential repercussions. In BW the community pro-league divide was ultimately addressed by ICCUP, but from all that I've seen of Blizzard they don't want a SC 2 ICCUP.
|
Where can I download these maps? I'd love to play with my friends on them.
|
On February 02 2011 07:22 Disastorm wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 07:09 ffz wrote:On February 02 2011 06:18 Disastorm wrote:On February 02 2011 01:05 Manimal_pro wrote:
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder Tbh theres not an *actual* point to ladder, they could just as easily play custom games on the maps they like all day long, and it would even be better practice if they were planning to go pro since theyd be playing on the pro maps. if these maps aren't being played on ladder then Idra really has no way to practice any matchup outside of ZvRet. I think Idra said something about GSL wanted the league to be open to everyone not jsut ppl with team so they might not use them in 1v1 league. But honestly i think the public outcry is so mucht hat they'll prob uses these for individual leagues as well. Idra is on team EG I imagine he should be able to get more practice partners than just Ret... Anyway, using custom maps on GSL does not make it so just ppl on a team can get experience, since anyone can just play "custom game" instead of "ladder" on regular bnet to practice.
So missing the point...
1.) I do believe the rest of EG aren't in Korea.
2.) Unless he wants laggy practice.
3.) Lack of variety of styles with fixed partners.
4.) 0 matchmaking. Lack of even level practice if you just randomly go around in custom games.
5.) Plenty of players like to practice on ladder even if they have a team.
|
On February 01 2011 02:38 Ameba-AZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:04 kgt wrote:hi... what if zerg spawn as red X and terran as green X? I think that spawning positions could be imbalanced; - Zerg cannot take his 3rd easily (tanks can reach drones from terran main base) - Potential muta harras is going to be harder if terran make some anti air in that "blue area with AA" (flying around can be easily spoted by marines at terran`s natural or wall). If Terran go for 1 thor it would be even harder to harras. - Terran can easily defend his natural and 3rd against ground army just with few siege tanks placed at "T blue area"... and also stop muta harrasing by placing few turrets at his 3rd. Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 01:27 kgt wrote:
hey, it is not about how to defeat terran in these spot locations...
I was trying to said that terran`s play at this map should be much easier than zerg`s (in that locations).
zerg have to destroy the rocks to get a base which is harder to defend, than terrans 3rd.
also notice that some aggresion from terran can easily prevent from taking 3rd base by zerg... (siege tanks at higher ground in the middle of the map) REALLY?! You're seriously already saying the spawn locations are potentially imbalanced... What about if the opposite happens and terran's third is now open to the Zerg's muta harass, and the Zerg's third is now almost untouchable unless you fly all the way around the map to drop it, or break right up into his base. Your little diagram is cute and all but I'm seriously fed up with this imbalanced notion everyone seems to be so fixed on. I could draw shapes and color bases with arrows to prove how on most every map that's ever been made there's a way that one race can potentially be in a better position given a certain style of play, and I could even begin to show you how your scenario is a problem of the player themselves and not an issue of "imbalances" in a map. If you haven't caught my point, next time don't use the word imbalanced in your post if your curious how something like the spawn locations could potentially effect a game and maybe I'll take the time to draw you pictures and dotted lines, and we can have an intelligent coversation about the matter. Edit: I'm extremely excited to see these maps implimented! I forsee some epic games coming from them.
Have you guys played the map? That's not really a third. It has like 5 blue minerals. It's some gimmicky 0.5 base.
|
So wait, I'm dumb, when I first head GSTL - I thought these were 2v2 matches.
Or are these clans wars? Like those unbroadcasted ones back 2 months ago?
|
On February 03 2011 02:06 Ownos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2011 07:22 Disastorm wrote:On February 02 2011 07:09 ffz wrote:On February 02 2011 06:18 Disastorm wrote:On February 02 2011 01:05 Manimal_pro wrote:
i see a lot of zergs here getting a boner for the new map pool and the double bunker contain removal but though luck boys, these changes are not coming to ladder Tbh theres not an *actual* point to ladder, they could just as easily play custom games on the maps they like all day long, and it would even be better practice if they were planning to go pro since theyd be playing on the pro maps. if these maps aren't being played on ladder then Idra really has no way to practice any matchup outside of ZvRet. I think Idra said something about GSL wanted the league to be open to everyone not jsut ppl with team so they might not use them in 1v1 league. But honestly i think the public outcry is so mucht hat they'll prob uses these for individual leagues as well. Idra is on team EG I imagine he should be able to get more practice partners than just Ret... Anyway, using custom maps on GSL does not make it so just ppl on a team can get experience, since anyone can just play "custom game" instead of "ladder" on regular bnet to practice. So missing the point... 1.) I do believe the rest of EG aren't in Korea. 2.) Unless he wants laggy practice. 3.) Lack of variety of styles with fixed partners. 4.) 0 matchmaking. Lack of even level practice if you just randomly go around in custom games. 5.) Plenty of players like to practice on ladder even if they have a team.
uhh... GSL is not going to choose their maps based on whether or not Idra is going to have a better or worse time practicing... and they are most definitely not going to choose incredibly stupid maps so that he can play more ladder games
|
What's with the 7 mineral patch expansions on Crossfire?
|
im not such a big fan of crevasse, i played a couple cgs on it and it was huuuuuuge. but terminus re, tal'darim altar and crossfire are all great maps. looking forward to a great next season of GSL
|
What happened to biohazard!?!?!?!!!!?!?!?! It was by far the best looking and fun to play map. Any1 know why it was removed? O_O
Played a few games on Tal'darim (or however its spelled) and it was pretty awesome. I love the map, big ramps at the center setting up for fun battles, multiple attack paths, etc.
Didnt try crevase yet. Terminus w/e its called I tried as well but it was pretty boring imo, nothing exciting about hte map. Havent tried crossfire either but I've played peaks of beakdu on BW so yea, lol
Edit: but seriously, WTF HAPPENED TO BIOHAZARD? O_O_O
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49889 Posts
Biohazard got a lot of negative response in testing so they pulled it out a few weeks ago.
|
I think they overdid it with the distance between bases. The maps are A LOT bigger than they look.
The way each race is going to be played will significantly change, as Zerg will almost always have map control on these big maps.
|
these maps dont seem balanced to me. big maps but in base expos stronly favor toss/terran over zerg. makes it so easy for a toss/terran to be greedy as heck
|
Anyone know a date in which blizzard will update ladder map pool according to the new GSL standards? Would be nice to not have to search custom games for these, and can ladder with them =)
Thank you everyone!
|
zerg is going to have some fun on crossfire if they spawn diagonal to there opponent.. Im guessing they put these maps in for the team league they have coming up
|
Not sayin the maps are bad but there is a main theme in all these maps...
Ramp chokes into center control area
Gives it a challenge but idk... Just not enough variety for 4 maps
|
Can SzoMoru PLEASE fix TerminusRE on NA so that you can have more than 2 OBS? It was screwed up in publishing so its still not fixed. The way to fix it should be explained here -
I'm pretty sure he locked the maps so only he can edit them, but it kinda sucks right now.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189619
|
On February 05 2011 02:33 War Horse wrote:Can SzoMoru PLEASE fix TerminusRE on NA so that you can have more than 2 OBS? It was screwed up in publishing so its still not fixed. The way to fix it should be explained here - I'm pretty sure he locked the maps so only he can edit them, but it kinda sucks right now. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189619
I just uploaded the new version (I think? It was sent to me via PM lol) it's named GSL TerminusRe (Unofficial Obs Fix)
|
Oh well btw Crossfire SE didnt have the proper game mode too. I hope SCC-Faust uploads its afap :D. I will pay more attention to it next time. It mustve slipped me somehow.
Edit: I guess Crossfire worked fine though aaah anyways now its defiantly fixed
On February 05 2011 02:33 War Horse wrote:Can SzoMoru PLEASE fix TerminusRE on NA so that you can have more than 2 OBS? It was screwed up in publishing so its still not fixed. The way to fix it should be explained here - I'm pretty sure he locked the maps so only he can edit them, but it kinda sucks right now. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189619
I wouldnt mind to upload them unlocked. However the original creator did upload them locked. So I dont really want to change that. Also it keeps 100 people from uploading the same map and its easier for people to find the latest and official map.
|
I'm pretty happy with the new maps. Good to see a fresh change, though I think Tal'Darim is a bit intimidating. Too big!
|
Love the maps, especially Crossfire although I find the third base a little far away.
I would love to know how you can take an overview picture of a map with hard tiles (decals) in without them being bugged. I find they are distorted when viewed from far away and appear as rectangles or lines. (referring to the Tal'Darim overview)
Personally I am not so keen on the idea of gold expansions without gas. I wouldn't take it unless I had to, especially not if it's vulnerable. I prefer the idea of gold expos being something really valuable to fight over. I do, however, like the normal expansions with less minerals available so that they run out faster, nice.
|
Have they just recently disabled the ability to save replays on these new maps? Today I downloaded updates to the maps on EU from lolpatrol (including the fixed Lost Temple, Xel'Naga Caverns and Metalopolis) and I could not record any replays on them. Since GomTV do not release replays this would make sense for them, so that the small possibility of replays being leaked is completely negated. But I would hate to see tournaments like MLG pick up some of the GSL maps and then be unable to release replays. Please reconsider.
|
Hmm you are right. I guess for the GSTL they wont get any special Blizzard Accounts so people might look up the BOs etc online to prevent that they made these changes to the maps.
To be honest I have no Idea how to fix that. You have to do some things in the data editor in the score results etc. Oh well I will open a thread on the custom map section tomorrow maybe somebody will figure it out how to fix it.
|
GSTL new maps are fully ready for the league now.
|
These maps, especially with the final tweaks, are so good.
We should really start an initiative to get these maps in the map pool on ladder.
|
Noobish question, but how hard is it to get these maps on Ladder?
|
|
|
On February 08 2011 17:02 RukKus wrote:
Noobish question, but how hard is it to get these maps on Ladder?
Depends how many emails you send to blizzard esports division.
|
Dont want to start a new thread because it is possible that I am just missing something... Well, here is my question..:
Today I played some fun games on some of the GSTL maps that could be chosen when creating a custom game. I wanted to do this again, now but it seems that those maps (all maps with GSTL tag) have been removed. Is it possible that Blizz doesnt want us to play those maps? Or is it just a buig or because they maybe wernt official GSTL maps?
I could not find anything about it with the search function but maybe someone knows something about it?!
|
@Sewi: search "GSL", you should be able to find them.
|
On February 12 2011 04:17 UruzuNine wrote:
@Sewi: search "GSL", you should be able to find them.
I find them, thats not the problem.
The problem is that I get a msg that says something like "This map is not available, maybe it has been removed" when I want to open them
|
On February 12 2011 04:26 Sewi wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 12 2011 04:17 UruzuNine wrote:
@Sewi: search "GSL", you should be able to find them. I find them, thats not the problem. The problem is that I get a msg that says something like "This map is not available, maybe it has been removed" when I want to open them
Oh, that's really weird. I've never had that happen, but then again I'm on NA server (I'm assuming you're EU, since your profile says Germany. ).
|
On February 12 2011 03:23 Sewi wrote:
Dont want to start a new thread because it is possible that I am just missing something... Well, here is my question..:
Today I played some fun games on some of the GSTL maps that could be chosen when creating a custom game. I wanted to do this again, now but it seems that those maps (all maps with GSTL tag) have been removed. Is it possible that Blizz doesnt want us to play those maps? Or is it just a buig or because they maybe wernt official GSTL maps?
I could not find anything about it with the search function but maybe someone knows something about it?!
Try again. Yesterday / 2 day ago I renamed all the maps. from GSTL / GSL .. to GSTL GSL :D. maybe you tried to play on them while I did the renaming.
|
What do you guys think of the problem with current blizzard maps having too narrow of attack paths?
Aside from the close position spawn problem on LT and metal, the resource distribution seems pretty balanced. The sheer amount of expos on some of the new Gom maps seems a little overboard. They also have a ton of dead space for air harassment. Terminus looks to be the only map that opens up attack paths.
I also wonder if the longer rush distances won't favor protoss warp tech even more, since it nullifies reinforcement travel time.
I do like some of ingenious ways the creators used to solve problems, like destructible on the ramp and neutral supply centers.
Lastly, my eyes hurt looking at Crevasse and Terminus.
|
On February 01 2011 00:09 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 00:05 Ribbon wrote:
It'll take exactly one (1) game of someone abusing rotational symmetry in Terminus Re for TL to declare it the worstest map EVAR.
Rotational symmetry existed in BW without many problems. The balance differences between rotationally different spawn positions won't be greater than differing spawn positions on a map like say Metalopolis.
I don't understand why every map must be rotationally balanced. As long as there is access to substantially similar expansions, similar chokes, and similar mineral layout why must every map me a mirror? It's boring.
|
Scouting and information would become impossible at lower levels.
I can hide my tech everywhere on those huge maps and boom - say 'hello' to my DTs :D
|
Where can i download these maps if i want to play them? i know that taldarim altar is in the map pool, but where can i get the other ones?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/2/2c/Crossfire.jpg/405px-Crossfire.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xJhja.jpg)
