Good time to be Terran...Wow blizzard I am dissapoint.

The close positions on these maps are really close. 3 of the maps have pretty much the exact same layout with a few minor tweaks.

Everything that the GSL and other tournaments are doing well these maps do poorly.

Test Map 2 is the only map with any promise and even that is low. Sad times

Jayjay54

Germany2296 Posts

February 04 2011 05:31 GMT

#182

at least two of them are (old) jungle basin over and over again. no reasonable third, as someone said before.

It has become so easy for t and p to fast expand. how can zerg be one base up. i don't get, why blizzard does not see this.

Comprissent

United States314 Posts

February 04 2011 05:32 GMT

#183

All of these maps look to be just LT / metal clones... 4 possible spawns with rush distance different depending on spawns... Come on and get new 1v1 only maps!

Megaliskuu

United States5123 Posts

February 04 2011 05:32 GMT

#184

Map 5 is the worst piece of shit I have ever seen, the nat is laid out like DQ, But also twice as big as metal. There are rocks that lead to your main. I don't understand why blizzard even tries making maps, they were never good at it.

Whoops i meant map 5 not 4

TelecoM

United States10834 Posts

February 04 2011 05:32 GMT

#185

Just played on the new maps on PTR and I must say, these are sooo much better, it somewhat forces solid play instead of so much all in play, because of the rush distances and the wide open ness of a lot of the maps, They are def. really good for Zerg

Blisse

Canada3710 Posts

February 04 2011 05:33 GMT

#186

Every base has a back entrance. Halp.

whaty0uwant

New Zealand346 Posts

February 04 2011 05:34 GMT

#187

All those maps look pretty ace tbh.

Ryuu314

United States12679 Posts

February 04 2011 05:35 GMT

#188

I haven't played these maps yet, but I really dont' care how it pans out tbh (I'm Protoss). They look plenty bigger and better than SoW and BS in the current mappool and at the very least, it shows that Blizzard is at least listening to the community and bringing in new maps.

They probably should've used the GSL stuff, but...still. At least we know SC2 won't go the way of War3. Blizzard/Activision is being as awesome as they can be

Antisocialmunky

United States5912 Posts

February 04 2011 05:35 GMT

#189

On February 04 2011 14:30 Serpico wrote:

Show nested quote +

lol god forbid a map is zerg favored. To be honest it might be a good thing to try them and see how much win %s change if they really are that good for zerg.

I think these looks bad for zerg. The only one that looks good to play on is LT 2.0 and the one with no gold expos but lots of expos.

KMARTRULES

Australia474 Posts

February 04 2011 05:38 GMT

#190

Either GSL needs to use blizzard maps or blizzard needs to use gsl maps. hard to practice maps when leagues use different maps to ladder

Joroth

United States318 Posts

February 04 2011 05:39 GMT

#191

Times like these makes me wish we could get a iccup 2.0

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

February 04 2011 05:40 GMT

#192

Is anyone able to get on PTR? It isn't working for me.

Consummate

Australia191 Posts

February 04 2011 05:40 GMT

#193

Test Map 1 is alright, not great, it allows you to take a safer 3rd (provided you didn't spawn close positions), other than that your natural can't be dropped like on the current Lost Temple.

Test Map 2 has a lot of potential if you couldn't both spawn top or bottom, don't necessarily need cross positions, if you start top left and your opponent bottom left, the map will be fine. The problem is when you spawn top left and your opponent top right. Anyway, you have a lot of relatively safe expansions, that map will be a macro map imo.

Test map 3 will be a 2 base style map, imo there are far too many rocks, the ramp leading into the natural is WAY too big and unless the map is played cross positions, I really don't see you taking anything other than a 3rd since any other expansions are pretty far.

Test map 4 assuming cross positions only (doesn't look that way based on rock placements), this map can be really good. You can get 3 bases easily with your 4th pretty far, but this looks like a very positional based map and I foresee it having very exciting games, that is of course if the map only allowed cross positions.

Test map 5 HAS to be cross positions otherwise the map will be terrible, with cross positions the map has a lot of potential.

But yeah, Test Map 2 and 4 look the most interesting, Test map 3 looks fairly terrible and Test map 1 is decent, Test map 5 can be up there with 2 and 4 if cross positions are forced.

Champi

1422 Posts

February 04 2011 05:41 GMT

#194

New LT looks okay, wont pass any judgement till i've played them, but from what i can see they dont look any bigger than the current maps in the pool, and im not sure about the design of some of these, they're all 4 player too...

i really wish blizzard would get off their high horse, and share this game with map makers who actually know what they are doing, imo plz stop trying to do everything blizzard...

DOMINOSC

Canada345 Posts

February 04 2011 05:43 GMT

#195

whats with the sc2-1 and sc2-2 when you go to log in are we finally being givin mnulti accounts or is it just for the ptr.

dtz

5834 Posts

February 04 2011 05:43 GMT

#196

On February 04 2011 13:40 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
I got this when I logged on. I can log onto SCII-1 and it selects my old PTR acct. When I select SCII-2 it is a totally different account...

[image loading]

I had this as well. But now when i load my normal SC2 ( non PTR) i have those options as well.

At first i was thinking, omg are they giving us 2 accounts now? But i logged in with both and they are the same whereas in PTR they are different.

Anyone knows what does SC2-1 and SC2-2 means in my normal sc2?

Xeph

Korea (South)191 Posts

February 04 2011 05:44 GMT

#197

On February 04 2011 14:38 KMARTRULES wrote:
Either GSL needs to use blizzard maps or blizzard needs to use gsl maps. hard to practice maps when leagues use different maps to ladder

TOTALLY AGREED.

freeto

United States122 Posts

February 04 2011 05:48 GMT

#198

to summarize heres what i see
map 1 - lost temple without the natural cliffs and the islands have paths to them with rocks. no obvious favoritism
map 3 - natural looks hard to defend with potentially 3 entrances and difficulty adding additional expansions without being very exposed.no obvious favoritism
map 2 - basically that one 4v4 map with single bases ofc instead of double and no gold expos. overall a decent map, due to its size, but taking a 3rd could be easier. also natural looks hard to defend. no obvious favoritism
map 4 - close positions ridiculously close and map layout is basically tankopolis. terran favored
map 5 - a fairly decent map except for the backdoor rocks between mains. this is such a short distance its basically impossible to engage a tank push. 3rd bases very hard to take. slightly terran favored

summary - as znowstorm said: good time to be terran. its good that blizzard is trying to improve their map pool, but the maps are still too small and in general still look like they're designed around "what looks cool" as opposed to "what plays good"

thats just my first impression. im sure as theyre played specifics will emerge that really affect balance and could completely fly in the face of what ive said here

Dommk

Australia4865 Posts

February 04 2011 05:49 GMT

#199

Maps look pretty bad for Protoss, LTv2 has the most open middle, would be hell vs Zerg/Terran. TP5 with 5second rush distance for those two basing Terrans...

FinestHour

United States18466 Posts

February 04 2011 05:50 GMT

#200

Has anyone looked at the Battle.net forums and seen if there are any blue posters talking about it there/people posting about this latest PTR build? Seeing as how, unfortunately, the majority of their feedback is from that godforsaken website.