EPTPatch 1.2.1 on PTR - Page 26
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
Rawr
Sweden624 Posts
| ||
|
Cosmos
Belgium1077 Posts
On February 05 2011 01:45 Muirhead wrote: What a travesty if professional Starcraft 2 and the blizzard ladder wind up using different maps :/. Blizzard should cede map making duties to the GSL if they don't want to split the competitive community. So true, I wish we can play in ladder the maps played by pro "on TV" :s | ||
|
Annq
Germany104 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
I wonder this too since it still takes the same time to run a unit to another persons base as in all the other maps. 4 gate warpin allins and 8 scv/marine rush will still dominate. No need for a early expansions play... since you will die! | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
1) The new maps look interesting. I have some concern over some of the close-spawn possibilities. 2) There are some pretty bad maps in the current pool and only a couple of good ones. This leads people to view new maps with the "what is wrong with this?" mentality rather than the "what makes this cool?" viewpoint. People are so negatively skewed towards the map pool that they're immediately trying to pick holes in everything :/ | ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
| ||
|
mizU
United States12125 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51094 Posts
LOL! not true because you can easily get 3 bases...that macro therefore false! | ||
|
nehl
Germany270 Posts
i just played a game on it, andaccidently took my 3rd as natural. and then the natural, was pretty easy. the toss couldnot do anything. it almost seems to be zerg favored°° and the new lost Temple is quite good. im just missing the xel naga towers. this one to´wer is not the same  | ||
|
kNightLite
United States408 Posts
On February 04 2011 18:37 smileyyy wrote: Im really astonished that people really thought that Blizzard will add non-Blizzard maps to their own ladder xD. That wont happen anytime soon. Well time to play some customs on the new maps Some better pics of the maps. + Show Spoiler [Test Map 1] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/aZ3JO.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Test Map 2] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/4Oh8j.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Test Map 3] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/RYs0a.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Test Map 4] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/YpOpS.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Test Map 5] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/h9bgF.jpg) The OP should edit in these photos IMO, they're way better. I am concerned about the changes to LT. Getting rid of the natural cliff was obviously a good idea. Removing the cross position xel nagas towers though? That removes strategic play from the map, and adds nothing. The one central xelnaga now is worthless because there's soooo much open space in the middle. I'm not a fan of turning the islands into rocked expansions either...if this replaces LT, scrap will be the only map with an island expansion. (and even then, it's positioned so poorly it's rarely used) Another problem with LT2.0 is that there's still no fix for close positions. It seems like all the test maps are metalopolis clones plus rocks, where cross-positions look good but close-positions look bad. I don't know why blizzard would aim for that, I don't think I've heard anyone say they enjoy playing small maps close spawns ever. Or rock-heavy maps for that matter. I mean I'm willing to withold final judgement on these maps until they're fully tested. But I think it's really sad that both GSL and iccup maps have near 100% positive feedback, while these blizzard maps seem to be closer to 50%. I don't understand why blizzard doesn't just use the GSL maps. The Koreans proved in BW they have the best mapmakers. And blizzard has a much much better business arrangement with GSL than they did with kespa. If their business partner is putting in the time and effort to test your maps, why not just let them do it instead of wasting your own resources. It's in blizzards best interest for there to be a unified map pool. Currently I watch GSL&MLG instead of iccup precisely because I can learn stuff from watching the play and applying it to my own laddering. Dont get me wrong I love the iccup maps so much more than blizzard's, but why waste time watching a match played on a map totally different from what I play on the ladder? | ||
|
tenklavir
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 05 2011 00:59 oXoCube wrote: Your average TL poster has a very specific mindset about what they want your average ladder map to look like. It appears to differ greatly from what blizzard is after. From what I've been able to gather from these posts, this seems to be the map-style that this community wants: 1) Huge size, almost absurdly large. Early game dynamic nearly non-existent due to spawn distances. Early all-ins not really possible (for better or for worse). Because of the size, everyone can 1 rax FE/ 1gate FE/15 hatch and spend 10 minutes macroing without much fear. Scouting whether your opponent was going for 5rr, stim push, or 4 gate no longer necessary. 2) Easy to defend natural so you can keep you unit ball clumped at a choke at the natural instead of having to spread and defend it from more than one position. 3) Easy 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Army positioning and composition should not be a factor in defending an expo outside of your easy to defend natural. 4) No backdoor to main. Only one way in or out of the main on the ground. If someone wants to attack your main, they better do it in the air or get through your ball of units. 5) No destructible rocks at expos. Yes the list above was somewhat sarcasm-laden in the extended description but I think the points are on target. I've said it here before and I'll say it again. Imho, not everyone on the ladder wants to have to play a 30-minute macro game every time they hit Find Match. Blizz knows this. Do you think that's what Bronze and Silver league players want? I enjoy the current average ladder game time and the current map pool (mostly) affords this and it looks like the PTR maps will too. Depending on how the game progresses it can be over in 15 or evolve to a macro game. There's something to be said for the tension in how a game progresses. Is your opponent trying to take it to a macro game? Is he going for an early push or all-in? What information do I have? What should I do based on what I know? - these are questions that don't really matter in the first 10 minutes* of a game on the monstrous GSL/iCCup maps. That would be just as uninteresting to me while watching a pro match-up. Same openings, macro up, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Blizz had provided us with perfect maps so far. Steppes, DQ, JB are some obvious examples. However I don't think iCCup or the GSL maps are the be-all end-all of maps either nor do I think they would be good for the ladder as a whole. *Edit - not exactly 10 obviously, but you get the idea. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
.I wasnt a fan of test map 2 at first but after seeing it closer up it doesnt seem to bad except the rocks at the fourth base. Map 3 seems a bit too good for seige tanks especially at the open gold bases. Map 4 is just absoulutely terrible, worse for taking a third than blistering sands Map 5 close positions seem worse than metalopolis and the natural expansion is like 250 degrees open and behind the ramp so you can even defend both at once, plus the third being rocked off is just stupid and they seemed to add the worst thing about shakuras to the map the back rocks. | ||
|
SoLaR[i.C]
United States2969 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:34 tenklavir wrote: From what I've been able to gather from these posts, this seems to be the map-style that this community wants: 1) Huge size, almost absurdly large. Early game dynamic nearly non-existent due to spawn distances. Early all-ins not really possible (for better or for worse). Because of the size, everyone can 1 rax FE/ 1gate FE/15 hatch and spend 10 minutes macroing without much fear. Scouting whether your opponent was going for 5rr, stim push, or 4 gate no longer necessary. 2) Easy to defend natural so you can keep you unit ball clumped at a choke at the natural instead of having to spread and defend it from more than one position. 3) Easy 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Army positioning and composition should not be a factor in defending an expo outside of your easy to defend natural. 4) No backdoor to main. Only one way in or out of the main on the ground. If someone wants to attack your main, they better do it in the air or get through your ball of units. 5) No destructible rocks at expos. Yes the list above was somewhat sarcasm-laden in the extended description but I think the points are on target. I've said it here before and I'll say it again. Imho, not everyone on the ladder wants to have to play a 30-minute macro game every time they hit Find Match. Blizz knows this. Do you think that's what Bronze and Silver league players want? I enjoy the current average ladder game time and the current map pool (mostly) affords this and it looks like the PTR maps will too. Depending on how the game progresses it can be over in 15 or evolve to a macro game. There's something to be said for the tension in how a game progresses. Is your opponent trying to take it to a macro game? Is he going for an early push or all-in? What information do I have? What should I do based on what I know? - these are questions that don't really matter in the first 10 minutes* of a game on the monstrous GSL/iCCup maps. That would be just as uninteresting to me while watching a pro match-up. Same openings, macro up, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Blizz had provided us with perfect maps so far. Steppes, DQ, JB are some obvious examples. However I don't think iCCup or the GSL maps are the be-all end-all of maps either nor do I think they would be good for the ladder as a whole. *Edit - not exactly 10 obviously, but you get the idea. Yes. People also need to remember that this game isn't Broodwar and that a simple transitioning of maps from one game to another has limited relevance. Making a map size too big is ultimately destructive and the early game flies right out the window. Seems the community wants maps to be absurdly easy for their respective races. | ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:34 tenklavir wrote: From what I've been able to gather from these posts, this seems to be the map-style that this community wants: 1) Huge size, almost absurdly large. Early game dynamic nearly non-existent due to spawn distances. Early all-ins not really possible (for better or for worse). Because of the size, everyone can 1 rax FE/ 1gate FE/15 hatch and spend 10 minutes macroing without much fear. Scouting whether your opponent was going for 5rr, stim push, or 4 gate no longer necessary. 2) Easy to defend natural so you can keep you unit ball clumped at a choke at the natural instead of having to spread and defend it from more than one position. 3) Easy 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Army positioning and composition should not be a factor in defending an expo outside of your easy to defend natural. 4) No backdoor to main. Only one way in or out of the main on the ground. If someone wants to attack your main, they better do it in the air or get through your ball of units. 5) No destructible rocks at expos. Yes the list above was somewhat sarcasm-laden in the extended description but I think the points are on target. I've said it here before and I'll say it again. Imho, not everyone on the ladder wants to have to play a 30-minute macro game every time they hit Find Match. Blizz knows this. Do you think that's what Bronze and Silver league players want? I enjoy the current average ladder game time and the current map pool (mostly) affords this and it looks like the PTR maps will too. Depending on how the game progresses it can be over in 15 or evolve to a macro game. There's something to be said for the tension in how a game progresses. Is your opponent trying to take it to a macro game? Is he going for an early push or all-in? What information do I have? What should I do based on what I know? - these are questions that don't really matter in the first 10 minutes* of a game on the monstrous GSL/iCCup maps. That would be just as uninteresting to me while watching a pro match-up. Same openings, macro up, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Blizz had provided us with perfect maps so far. Steppes, DQ, JB are some obvious examples. However I don't think iCCup or the GSL maps are the be-all end-all of maps either nor do I think they would be good for the ladder as a whole. *Edit - not exactly 10 obviously, but you get the idea. Heres my list: 1) Balanced maps between all races 2) Bigger maps that sustain more expansions so you can at least have a reasonable option to a macro game, or at least so the game can develop constantly until the better player comes out on top with a strong late-game. On top of that, maps that have too close starting positions make 4 minute all ins very powerful which is not fun to play or to watch. Big maps will not stop all ins. You can all in at any point in the game. Players will also always find ways to apply early pressure so thats not a good counter-point. | ||
|
RyanRushia
United States2748 Posts
 will keep the game fresh | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:34 tenklavir wrote: From what I've been able to gather from these posts, this seems to be the map-style that this community wants: 1) Huge size, almost absurdly large. Early game dynamic nearly non-existent due to spawn distances. Early all-ins not really possible (for better or for worse). Because of the size, everyone can 1 rax FE/ 1gate FE/15 hatch and spend 10 minutes macroing without much fear. Scouting whether your opponent was going for 5rr, stim push, or 4 gate no longer necessary. 2) Easy to defend natural so you can keep you unit ball clumped at a choke at the natural instead of having to spread and defend it from more than one position. 3) Easy 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. Army positioning and composition should not be a factor in defending an expo outside of your easy to defend natural. 4) No backdoor to main. Only one way in or out of the main on the ground. If someone wants to attack your main, they better do it in the air or get through your ball of units. 5) No destructible rocks at expos. Yes the list above was somewhat sarcasm-laden in the extended description but I think the points are on target. I've said it here before and I'll say it again. Imho, not everyone on the ladder wants to have to play a 30-minute macro game every time they hit Find Match. Blizz knows this. Do you think that's what Bronze and Silver league players want? I enjoy the current average ladder game time and the current map pool (mostly) affords this and it looks like the PTR maps will too. Depending on how the game progresses it can be over in 15 or evolve to a macro game. There's something to be said for the tension in how a game progresses. Is your opponent trying to take it to a macro game? Is he going for an early push or all-in? What information do I have? What should I do based on what I know? - these are questions that don't really matter in the first 10 minutes* of a game on the monstrous GSL/iCCup maps. That would be just as uninteresting to me while watching a pro match-up. Same openings, macro up, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Blizz had provided us with perfect maps so far. Steppes, DQ, JB are some obvious examples. However I don't think iCCup or the GSL maps are the be-all end-all of maps either nor do I think they would be good for the ladder as a whole. *Edit - not exactly 10 obviously, but you get the idea. You can rush on BW maps. It's been done. Quite often, in fact. You basically wrote a huge block of text based on a misconception that many people who never followed the BW proscene have. | ||
|
tenklavir
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:45 R0YAL wrote: Heres my list: 1) Balanced maps between all races 2) Bigger maps that sustain more expansions so you can at least have a reasonable option to a macro game, or at least so the game can develop constantly until the better player comes out on top with a strong late-game. On top of that, maps that have too close starting positions make 4 minute all ins very powerful which is not fun to play or to watch. Big maps will not stop all ins. You can all in at any point in the game. I agree. I think everyone wants balanced maps between all races. How do we agree on such a thing though? Should there be a preset choke width for every map going into the natural, for instance? I agree and disagree with your second part. Reasonable option to macro, yes, but even some of the current maps provide that without being as large as iCCup/GSL. Also, why is it that the better player has to get to the late-game to come out on top? What if their early or mid game skills are their weaknesses? Are they still the better player or is someone not a better player for exploiting those weaknesses? You "can" all-in at any point in the game, of course. I was more referring to 2 rax SCV all-ins and such; what most people generally consider to be boring to watch or do. Thanks for your reply. | ||
|
SheaR619
United States2399 Posts
| ||
|
tenklavir
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:50 andrewlt wrote: You can rush on BW maps. It's been done. Quite often, in fact. You basically wrote a huge block of text based on a misconception that many people who never followed the BW proscene have. Admittedly my experience with the BW proscene is deep. Most VODs that I've pulled up have proceeded how I described so maybe I was unlucky in not finding a game where what you described has happened. I don't think that changes my point about why those maps aren't optimal for the ladder in Blizz's opinion. Edit: perhaps PM me a couple VODs? I'd certainly be interested in checking them out. | ||
|
pallad
Poland1958 Posts
On February 04 2011 13:45 [SNIPECLAN]_BoNJoVi_ wrote: this game will never compete with BW if maps stay like this Never say never , BW has 12 years , patches , custom maps etc.. How long SC 2 is live ? ... Try to think. I really like these maps , they are not perfect , but they are just good , thats it | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/152_Desperado.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/123_Neo%20Arkanoid.jpg)
