EPT2 strikes
Patch 1.2.1 on PTR - Page 23
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
andeh
United States904 Posts
2 strikes | ||
|
crappen
Norway1546 Posts
On February 04 2011 22:35 FryKt wrote: All of you who are defending BLizzard with all your might, just why? Why do you do that? Blizzard should do all they can to get us to stay" keep playing the game, buy expansions etc, play ladder" They are NOT doing us a favor in adding new maps, you make this seem like they are giving us a gift or something. OF COUSE THEY SHOULD ADD NEW MAPS IN FUCKING 6 MONTHS WHEN EVERYONE HATES THEM. Why the fuck they haven't yet is a mystery. Every one cries for bigger more sc1 maps, So why don't they fucking copy some from sc1, make them a little different, and keep some of the smaller ones we have now. So the noobies who don't like big maps can just vote them down, and vice versa. They try to balance everything over maps who the majority hates. And now they try to make some new maps, but I mean they fail. The first one, okei lost temple fixed. Which actually are a map old as rock. But it's one of the best with xelnaga and Shakruas( but shakuras have those f'ing backdoors) And when they make new maps, they put in all kind of shit, like rocks on every fucking expansion, grass everywhere so you don't see shit, but that's okey becouse there are 43572942 Xelnaga towers showing you when the opponents scv's are taking a shitbreak behind the backdoor rocks of everyfucking expansion. TL.DR: Blizzard are not doing us a favor, they are slow and try too much new. Start making maps which are more standard, THEN make all the rocks, grass and all that crap. Holy shit this is good, needs to be quoted and bumped. I dont understand the sheep mentality on so many people here, the work blizzard is doing is subpar right now, we need to give them clearer feedback like the quote above me, so that the thickheaded people at blizzard understand what they are doing is in fact wrong. They will never give up on sc2 cause we give them a shitstorm, they will improve. | ||
|
skrzmark
United States1528 Posts
| ||
|
aneruok
Canada122 Posts
| ||
|
ROOTdrewbie
Canada1392 Posts
| ||
|
ZenDeX
Philippines2916 Posts
The sad part about this is we are forced to endorse their maps instead of giving the credit to the people who already put blood, sweat and tears to melee mapmaking.  | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51094 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:16 Patriot.dlk wrote: I've seen and tested the GSL maps. Quite terrible imo and I give a lot more respect to blizzards mapmaking then the custom makers while this is only my opinion I think it's shared by many others. Custom makers use all kinds of things like rocks to block xel naga, expands with high gas / no gas and other features that is very premature. Brood war had those things added when the game was pretty much figured out and to start using gimmicks for maps now is so bad. So what if they test the map in Gisado Star challange? Blizzard is testing their maps on the test server so I don't see any issues? Having maps being split across leagues and not being playable on the ladder is not a good thing, it's particularly wrong when blizzard is obviously eyeballing the map issue. 1)I'm pretty sure there are more people for the GSL maps than against.(you can prove me wrong) 2)What?Blizzard is allowed to experiment with their maps but custom mapmakers aren't? 3)Bizzard maps are more Gimmicky than most custom maps,and a lot of them are unnecessary compared to Custom maps. 4)Sure the sample size of Gisado's Star challenge but the value of feedback is high and they are looking to make competitive maps not casual(hence why I haven't really expressed the want for them to be in ladder) 5)see 4-Pros will have to take it like BW pros having one map pool for MSL,one for OSL and one for standard Proleague. | ||
|
CryMore
United States497 Posts
| ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:23 skrzmark wrote: If they use GSL maps or ICCUP maps they have to give them credibility which they probably don't want to. Blizzard was getting pretty behind gsl so if anything I would have them support their maps. | ||
|
skrzmark
United States1528 Posts
| ||
|
Chise
Japan507 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:30 xixecal wrote: Nice to see some larger maps....but Blizz needs to realize you can macro maps that are not 4-player....3-player maps anyone? Wait...What maps are you talking about? | ||
|
War Horse
United States247 Posts
Fucking lazy of Blizzard | ||
|
monitor
United States2409 Posts
| ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
The maps: 1. Trying to fix Lost Temple. Some improvements. The middle is more open and you have an easier access to a third base via the "island". However, starting positions like 6 vs 2 and 9 vs 12 will still be awkward and make for bad games, favoring Terran over Protoss and Zerg and Protoss over Zerg. Positional imbalances are really bad to have on a map. 2. You think it's okay at first. But it's not! The natural expansion is very awkward and there's like 3 ways in. You can't defend that enourmous ramp and even if you did there's still rocks to break in. This is the same kind of crap we're used to on blistering sands (a map everybody hates). Fitting that the terrain is similar. 3. There's no third base in sight. The natural expansion is open like on Xel'Naga. We will see a lot of two base plays because of all the rocks. 4. Again a super-hard to defend natural expansion and no third base in sight. That it's a four player map will make up for this a little but look at the map. Imagine spawning 6 vs 9. It's a nightmare. One base fest here we go! 5. Here we go again. A very hard natural to defend. Third base? Sort of like on map 1. Same advantages, same problems. Main problem is of course that different spawn positions will affect the game dramatically. Spawning 6 vs 2 or 9 versus 12 will make for horrible games. Conclusions: Blizzard has learned that bigger maps are better and that four player maps are in general better than 2 player maps. Blizzard has not learnt anything about the value of having non-neutral expansions. This makes for bad games. Blizzard has not learnt anything about why positional imbalances make people mad. I give blizzard's effort 3/100 based on the fact that it's taken them this long to produce maps this bad. This is a very, very sad day. | ||
|
greycubed
United States615 Posts
On February 04 2011 23:54 BLinD-RawR wrote: What the...Patch 1.2.2 -Terran Race Removed from the Game. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Isuzy.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/716GT.jpg) | ||
|
Deleted User 124618
1142 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:23 crappen wrote: Holy shit this is good, needs to be quoted and bumped. I dont understand the sheep mentality on so many people here, the work blizzard is doing is subpar right now, we need to give them clearer feedback like the quote above me, so that the thickheaded people at blizzard understand what they are doing is in fact wrong. They will never give up on sc2 cause we give them a shitstorm, they will improve. To be quite blunt, that post complains about the existance of backdoors. To be blunt, complaining about those screams to me "I am unable to change my gameplay to account for possibility of two base entrances". Whyyy whyyy why why why why why are backdoors bad? Because you have to defend 2 locations? Only map in existance where attacker may have an advantage in that situation is Blistering Sand. So when I see a player complaining about a backdoor entrance, I see a flashing sign THIS IS A BAD PLAYER WHO CAN'T ADAPT. I'm sorry, but if Blizzard bashing is allowed in this thread, then that thing above is too. Oh, and the Lost Temple 2.0 is actually smallest map of the lot. Testmap 2 has 7 bases each, Metalopolis has 6, lost temple & lost temple 2.0 has 6 each, testmap 3 has 7 bases each, testmap 4 has like 5 for each, but even that is more than 1/2 of the map pool, testmap 5 has 6 bases each. Only complaint about maps being "too small" I could find is maybe the small rush distance, but that is a problem with zerg race in general, not the maps themselves. If zerg can't handle those distances, it's a race problem not map problem, IMO. I'm sorry I'm such a sheep. | ||
|
monitor
United States2409 Posts
Take a look at iCCup Pawn Re or iCCup Starlight Breaker for macro 1v1 maps. | ||
|
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51094 Posts
you didn't get it....read the post I quoted when I posted that post....its Sarcasm. ugh Romanians.... | ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:31 War Horse wrote: why not throw the GSL maps in the test server and see how well they work on ladder? Fucking lazy of Blizzard Based on how slow blizzard works I wouldn't be surprised if they're testing it internally and just haven't released it yet. They never rush things so I wouldn't expect them to push out those maps this fast. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:23 crappen wrote: Holy shit this is good, needs to be quoted and bumped. I dont understand the sheep mentality on so many people here, the work blizzard is doing is subpar right now, we need to give them clearer feedback like the quote above me, so that the thickheaded people at blizzard understand what they are doing is in fact wrong. They will never give up on sc2 cause we give them a shitstorm, they will improve. It's hard not to agree with this sentiment. While it's great that they finally stopped resting on their laurels and are publishing new maps, the fact they've waited almost a year to TEST a solution that has been recommended since the beta is ludicrous. This is obviously partially spurred by the GSL actually demonstrating initiative, and trying to preserve the integrity of their tournament with new maps. All videogame companies are notorious for being inefficient, and considering Blizzard took 12 years to develop SC2, they are no exception. If I were them I would seriously look at their "balance team" and ask myself what the hell they are actually doing all day. Because they could have tested this idea six months ago without any risk or cost. | ||
| ||
