EPTGo to your Starcraft 2 Folder and open the Public Testing Realm. or type in 'Public' into your Search on your comp. The patch will be downloaded through there :O
Patch 1.2.1 on PTR - Page 13
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
OmniscientSC2
United States713 Posts
Go to your Starcraft 2 Folder and open the Public Testing Realm. or type in 'Public' into your Search on your comp. The patch will be downloaded through there :O | ||
|
Sniffy
Australia290 Posts
| ||
|
MooseSoup
United States21 Posts
I see a lot of people complaining about short rush distances, but I'm assuming none of those people even played the maps; just made assumptions. There is one, maybe two maps with bad rush distances. Three of them are completely solid for macro play. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
I think it's too early to have any discussion about these maps. Until we get a decent number of higher level games on them, I don't think theorycrafting will reveal anything beyond the obvious. I also find it funny that Blizzard is pulling some maps out of their backroom archive of maps that were premiered during the Alpha builds at previous Blizzcons. | ||
|
Eviltoast
Australia166 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8ACcp.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Z92Bi.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eJdpa.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/E2y1c.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lmrwm.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/onMQn.jpg) | ||
|
Mazar
United States135 Posts
| ||
|
IndridCold
United States385 Posts
| ||
|
jfourz
Ireland421 Posts
![[image loading]](http://asialadders.battle.net/war3/images/ladder-revise/minimaps/Wetlands.jpg) i wonder if it will be shallow water too at the lowest level... either way the map is ascetically pleasing to my eyes, if not so much balance wise | ||
|
theqat
United States2856 Posts
On February 04 2011 15:57 jfourz wrote: testmap3 reminds me of the war3 map wetlands: i wonder if it will be shallow water too at the lowest level... either way the map is ascetically pleasing to my eyes, if not so much balance wise Just FYI, the word you're looking for is "aesthetically". Ascetically has a hugely different meaning that turns your sentence into gibberish  It does look a bit like Wetlands! | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10377 Posts
Also, it is a bit disheartening that apparently all 5? (how many exactly?) were exactly (or not?) the same as some of the maps Blizzard showed in the alpha stages of SC2? Idk if anyone noticed, testmap5 is basically New Antioch. I would think, like Testmap1, it is a "newer", more "balanced" version than New Antioch as Testmap1 is to Lost Temple, but is it possible this testmap5 is actually like a "downgrade" of New Antioch, pulled from the supposed "backroom archive"?  Anyways, still hoping these turn out well. Xel'Naga looked ugly and crappy at first, but it turned out really well | ||
|
Slivered Skin
Canada347 Posts
On February 04 2011 13:23 Deltablazy wrote: * Matchmaking has been updated to better match players queuing with pre-made teams in 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 brackets. Missed this the first time around. Remember all of those threads where people playing 2v2s with random teams were complaining about facing premade teams? Looks like blizzard listened to them and changed it. Ok. If it reduces the number of pointless threads on TL, I'm all for it. | ||
|
Slivered Skin
Canada347 Posts
On February 04 2011 15:55 Mazar wrote: Need to keep in mind that it is just the PTR and many things have changed between a PTR patch and the release of the patch before so hopefully blizzard will make a few changes before releasing the maps! Remember how long it took them to fix the small rock glitch on Shakuras Plateau? I doubt they'll make any alterations to the maps unless any of them have a major glitch; it's probably fairly low on their list of priorities. | ||
|
jfourz
Ireland421 Posts
On February 04 2011 15:59 theqat wrote: Just FYI, the word you're looking for is "aesthetically". Ascetically has a hugely different meaning that turns your sentence into gibberish It does look a bit like Wetlands! lol whoops, never trust auto correct ascetic indeed... | ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
Things to remember: These are test maps. Lots of silly things have been tested and rolled back. Test Map 1: It's Lost Temple, but better. Let's give Blizzard credit for improving a map. Close positions are still rough in ZvT, but no worse than the old Lost Temple. Test Map 2: I think this is the best map in the new pool, by far. The third is super-easy, close positions aren't super close, and cross positions will lead to epic macro games. I'm not the world's biggest fan of the natural to natural rocks on vertical spawns, but it's a lot easier for Zerg to deal with than the main to main rocks on Shakuras. If this map replaces Jungle Basin, I think it'll be the best map on the ladder. Too bad it's kind of ugly, though. Test Map 3: This is kind of strange. I think I kind of see what they were going for here, using rocks to keep the rush distances from being Zerg-favored, because the Terran can't knock them down until the midgame. It's a good concept, and Crevasse does it well, but I'm not a fan of it there. The distance between the main and natural, and the relatively close spawn positions, mean that this map could bring the marine SCV all-in back in style, which worries me. There's totally a third though, I don't know what people are talking about when they say there isn't. Test Map 4: I don't even understand this. I like the Xelnaga tower in the middle granting you vision of absolutely nothing, though. I have absolutely no idea what they were even thinking with this map. Worst map in the test pool, but at least that means it won't be on ladder. Test Map 5: It's like Shakuras, but not as good. If you don't spawn in close-by-rocks positions, it's okay, but not great. Zergs are getting better at dealing with the rocks on Shakuras close spots, but it's harder to take more bases while slowing down the attack here, because you need fighting units to kill the rocks. I don't hate rocks in principle, but they really hurt on this map. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
 ), but I always seem to lose to it in TvT!! | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
Espcially test map 3.... FF's with these narrow points are so easy to cut ur army in half or stop ya. Map is very large cant do anything about 1 gate FE. The third is about as easy ass the natural and has plenty of cliffs for collsi to work magic on your units. Toss gets 6 gas, and steam rolls you clean. | ||
|
Kmozar
Australia7 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On February 04 2011 16:04 Kmozar wrote: There is already so much crying about the map pool... The players are supposed to adapt to the game and map pool, the game isn't meant to adapt to them. You talking about this new map pool? If you're talking about the old one, they were just simply poor maps, even if we have somewhat "adapted" to the maps, it doesn't mean they are quality or fun to play on! I'm excited for these new maps, I think while definitely not perfect or even "top notch," they are easily an improvement on the existing map pool, which shows at least Blizzard is learning! As a heavily, heavily macro oriented T player (I never timing push well because I never go all-in enough with them, I always think "well let's make it slightly more econ oriented play," which causes my timing pushes always to still be a little to weak and not do quite enough damage, and then I'm still behind economically if not all-in. But when you're behind entering the mid-late game as Terran, it's no fun, T can only compete in the lategame riding an advantage . Started out as a Zerg, can't get late game out of my head, I just find it soooo much more fun/crazy/chaotic than early games that end quick, so these maps are receiving my seal of approval for now! | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51095 Posts
On February 04 2011 15:49 MooseSoup wrote: I just played all the maps. I see a lot of people complaining about short rush distances, but I'm assuming none of those people even played the maps; just made assumptions. There is one, maybe two maps with bad rush distances. Three of them are completely solid for macro play. Describe the rush distance in Testmap5 and 2v2 Testmap4 should become a 1v1 map like Shakuras Plateau with only vertical and cross positions. | ||
| ||
