EPTPatch 1.2.1 on PTR - Page 27
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
teemh
Canada120 Posts
| ||
|
Gecko
United States519 Posts
| ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
On February 04 2011 22:35 FryKt wrote: 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. OH NO BLIZZARD IS TRYING SOMETHING NEW THOSE INNOVATIVE BASTARDS HOW DARE THEY! Obviously, Blizzard should use standard maps. You may be wondering how they'll do that, since there aren't any accepted "standard" maps, yet. Shut up. FryKt has spoken. This kind of crap actually angers me. This kind of "My gut instinct is right and anyone who even tries anything else is a terrible person" attitude is one of the most depressing aspects of the human race. This post is so badly written I almost thought it was a strawman, but since so many people are quoting this post as awesome, let's go through it. All of you who are defending BLizzard with all your might, just why? Why do you do that? Basic fairness? Some of these maps are improvements. Some aren't. They're test maps. They're explicitly asking us what we think of these ideas they've cooked up. 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. Yeah! Why haven't Blizzard changed the map pool before now?! I'm so sick of playing Desert Oasis and Kulas Ravine! I'm also curious to see your scientific poll on "everyone". 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. This is what all the haters really want. You know, SC2 didn't beat Brood War to death with a wrench. You can still play it. I even think a BW map might be more fun to play BW on, seeing as it was designed for that game and not this one. 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. I like how "everyone" got downgraded to "the majority". Still not true, though. Team Liquid is far from the majority of Starcraft 2 players. And now they try to make some new maps, but I mean they fail. The first one, okei lost temple fixed. ALL THE MAPS SUCK. OKAY THIS ONE'S GOOD. Which actually are a map old as rock. This isn't a sentence  But it's one of the best with xelnaga and Shakruas( but shakuras have those f'ing backdoors) ALL THE MAPS SUCK, EXCEPT THIS ONE, THIS ONE, AND SOMETIMES THIS ONE. 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. It's almost like they're tying to make the maps interesting. Pricks. You know, if you "NO TOWERS. ZERG ONLY. FINAL DESTINATION" types had your way, there wouldn't be a map pool at all. There'd be a single map (Probably Python), and every single game would be played on it. I like all the people acting like rocks/towers/grass is inherently bad, just because your precious Brood War didn't have them. I've seen televangelists more open to the idea of evolution than you guys. The way to make Starcraft 2 better than Brood War is to innovate. We need to try new things and mess around. And yes, sometimes things won't work. Fucking deal with it. I'm sick of you spoiled brats so unused to the concept of "working to improve" that it doesn't even occur to you other people can do it. I don't want Starcraft 2 to be Brood War. There's already a Brood War, and it's time to stop idolizing it. It was a very good game, but it's time to make a better one. And that's going to mean taking a step into the unknown, and trying new ideas. I understand change is scary, and work is hard. But instead of bitching that Starcraft 2 isn't exactly the same as Starcraft 1, why don't you take all your rage, use it productively, and make the good maps you want, since it's apparently so easy. 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. I already mocked this, but I'm quoting it again because it's hilarious. | ||
|
slowzerg
United States62 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:34 tenklavir wrote: 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. I'd love to see Bronze and Silver League gamers polled because I'm fairly certain you're wrong and they despise Blizzard's jail cell maps just as much as the pros. In fact, most of their complaints on these forums from lower level players are in the vain of "I'm tired of being cheesed!" and "I macro but I still lose"* I don't think I've ever seen them say "I'm tired of these 40 minute slugfests on cross position spawns/Shakuras!" * They're not actually macro'ing that well. | ||
|
StifSokSamurai
United States120 Posts
On February 04 2011 13:57 aike wrote: Not completely true, Kespa maps had blocked expos all the time. Most common map ever... Python... lol. Also Grand Line, I'm sure there's more but those are the 2 coming to mind where they blocked expos. Are you honestly trying to relate blank - 8 mineral nodes that stopped floating CC's to destructible rocks being spackled across the land like acne cream across a 14 year old's face? | ||
|
kNightLite
United States408 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:34 tenklavir wrote: 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 I saw many more people play 30 minute games in lower leagues. In fact whenever I won a game in under 10 minutes in bronze/silver chances are pretty good that my opponent would whine/cry. As I moved up in leagues people cried less. So I would actually argue the opposite, that low league ladder wants larger maps even more than high leagues. I mean seriously, look at lower league games and you won't see people perfecting their 2 rax all ins, that's diamond+. Instead you'll see stuff like mass battlecruiser or void ray without any attacking before 200 food. | ||
|
tenklavir
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 05 2011 03:02 slowzerg wrote: I'd love to see Bronze and Silver League gamers polled because I'm fairly certain you're wrong and they despise Blizzard's jail cell maps just as much as the pros. In fact, most of their complaints on these forums from lower level players are in the vain of "I'm tired of being cheesed!" and "I macro but I still lose"* I don't think I've ever seen them say "I'm tired of these 40 minute slugfests on cross position spawns/Shakuras!" * They're not actually macro'ing that well. You may be right but large maps doesn't help the lack of mechanical ability to handle large macro games. Instead of seeing maybe 50/50 "I'm tired of being cheesed"/"I macro'd and lost", we'll just get 80/20 "I macro'd and lost" from whoever happened to win or lose for whatever reason. Thanks. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:57 Ribbon wrote: But instead of bitching that Starcraft 2 isn't exactly the same as Starcraft 1, why don't you take all your rage, use it productively, and make the good maps you want, since it's apparently so easy. I just have lol at this, because that's exactly what iccup and the gom team have done and Blizzard throws this crap at us. Let's have some maps with a decently defendable natural that doesn't have a backdoor right into it. Shakuras is the closest we have, a couple more would be nice. If Blizzard can do that I'll start giving them some faith. But when 4/5 maps they create have a wide open natural way too far out from the main then I'll continue to think that the only strategy they understand is one basing. | ||
|
tenklavir
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 05 2011 03:04 kNightLite wrote: I saw many more people play 30 minute games in lower leagues. In fact whenever I won a game in under 10 minutes in bronze/silver chances are pretty good that my opponent would whine/cry. As I moved up in leagues people cried less. So I would actually argue the opposite, that low league ladder wants larger maps even more than high leagues. I mean seriously, look at lower league games and you won't see people perfecting their 2 rax all ins, that's diamond+. Instead you'll see stuff like mass battlecruiser or void ray without any attacking before 200 food. They may be 30 minutes, but is that because there are only 18 harversters per base or they are banking tons of mins and gas to get to BCs/carriers/thors/etc.? The length doesn't have much to do with the quality of their game. Perhaps even losing games early, they (hopefully) take initiative in improving and being able to combat early game tactics. One can always hope. Thanks. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On February 05 2011 02:54 tenklavir wrote: 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. I mostly follow just a few players and teams. Recent games I can think of are Fantasy vs Calm where Calm 6-pooled two straight games. There was a game between Jaedong and Stork a few months ago as well where Stork built 3-4 gateways near Jaedong's natural. Or just about any PvZ game involving a hydra timing push or a zealot timing push. Most BW games are just 10-25 minutes long. The 25 minute ones involve late game units and many mined out bases. I don't really think balance is important right now in SC2. I find watching pro games incredibly boring. It really just involves players building forces inside their base then going all-in or clashing in the middle. You can't leave your base since the other guy can easily wipe you out. That's in contrast with BW with players harassing and patrolling units all over the map since it's safer to not have all your units protecting your main. | ||
|
Epsilon8
Canada173 Posts
| ||
|
PiLoKo
Mexico144 Posts
| ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 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. Players will also always find ways to apply early pressure so thats not a good counter-point. But the problem there is that I dont think we can safely say that big maps would be balanced between all races. With terran generally having their dominant period in the early-midgame, a big map may very well make them too weak in the macro game. Game balance from day 1 has been based on small maps, and adding maps that are really big could bring unpredictable results. Rocks, hard to take thirds and relatively short attack distances are all things that the current balance is based on. Thats why we need small, gradual increases in map size. Not BW and copying what we have there. These maps are a good first step since are somewhat similar to the existing large maps like Shakuras, which have proven to bring some nice macro games. The next iteration may very well be a little bigger again. | ||
|
IndieFinch
United States124 Posts
Didn't realize there was so much hate for rocks / grass / xel'naga towers out there. Personally these are my favorite parts of the Starcraft 2 maps. They keep it fresh and entertaining, not enough to effect balance but enough to add in little strategic advantages. So the more the better imo... The only one that scares me a bit is Test Map3, the rush distance seems very very short. Also keep in mind we can down vote 3 maps. It is good to have a diversified map pool, just check off the ones you dislike. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
| ||
|
Combine
United States812 Posts
| ||
|
tiaxone
United States3 Posts
On February 04 2011 13:40 Plexa wrote: The point is that now the ladder map pool =/= the map pool for the largest tournament which is bound to cause problems Have you played the gsl maps. They are huge and almost force games into a huge macro builds where both players can easily take three bases. While I don't think anything is wrong with this I don't think this size map would be appropriate for the fast play that people expect on the ladder maps. These maps are designed to force long games. | ||
|
Tankbusta
United States109 Posts
why cant we have destination in sc2? swap out the one really played map with the other really played map! | ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
It's about ensuring we get quality games. Both so we can enjoy playing them and enjoy watching them. You're only supposed to get real macro games 20+ minutes when 2 players are fairly even in skill. It's not as if it was impossible to end games early in BW and it won't be impossible on better maps than these either. | ||
|
SerraAngelDK
Denmark11 Posts
| ||
| ||
