Not a big fan of a lot of the maps. I don't think that destructible rocks in between close spawn positions is much of a good thing. If anything, it opens up a 2nd front that you have to worry about, and it can get very annoying.
I have hope that at least one or two will be legit. Awesome.
I think it's awesome they are working to improve the map pool and have faith that over time (NOT immediately; doubtless the new maps will have some flaws - but hopefully less) we'll have a pool of solid maps.
glad to see Blizzard attempting to make changes in their maps and map pool
not glad to see that Blizzard does not fully understand why there is so much bitching about the maps. an example would be removing the cliff drops on the natural on Lost Temple but keeping the possibility of spawning close position (I'm assuming close spawn position on LT is still possible).
having a PTR for them is definitely a good thing though
I would really like to know where the actual 1v1 maps are or if there are any, using 2v2 maps for 1v1 is fine and all...but every test map being a 2v2 is kind of sad.
On February 05 2011 04:04 udgnim wrote: glad to see Blizzard attempting to make changes in their maps and map pool
not glad to see that Blizzard does not fully understand why there is so much bitching about the maps. an example would be removing the cliff drops on the natural on Lost Temple but keeping the possibility of spawning close position (I'm assuming close spawn position on LT is still possible).
having a PTR for them is definitely a good thing though
Yeah, it seems these new maps are very similar to the crappy maps they replaced. Blizzard with maps reminds me of Matt Millen with WRs and Rick Pitino with tall stiffs.
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.
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.
Large maps have never stopped early aggression from being effective. Your example about the 4-gate is particularly incorrect, since the nature of warpgates negates rush distance anyways.
FIVE 4-player maps. You have to be kidding me Blizzard. I like that you are at least willing to change maps (albeit 6 months too late), but at least keep some variety in the pool. Here's to hoping they have the sense to not add all of these.
Maybe its just all the WC3 I played before, but I'm just happy to see any new map put out by blizzard (were creep spawns that hard to figure out???). Really. Better or worse... something new. Win or lose, variety is the real formula for fun imho. Not to mention in the DLC age they probably could've started charging for new maps... (crosses fingers)
I'll definitely be laddering more again now that there's something new to explore .
Just played a TVT on map #2. It was very excellent. Went 5base 5base and we both got to BC tech. I won with superior vikings and upgrades.
The rush distance was just the right distance IMO. Not so close that rushing is OP but not too far where it's no longer an option. Nat wasn't terribly easy to defend but I managed. After taking nat, 3rd and 4th came easily.
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.
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.
Large maps have never stopped early aggression from being effective. Your example about the 4-gate is particularly incorrect, since the nature of warpgates negates rush distance anyways.
Of course. But to do ALL-IN or Early marine Rush will be harder, and will need a lot of micro. And thats good. The problem was that in short maps like steppes etc., the rushes were extremely effective and didnt need any micro at all.
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.
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.
Large maps have never stopped early aggression from being effective. Your example about the 4-gate is particularly incorrect, since the nature of warpgates negates rush distance anyways.
Of course. But to do ALL-IN or Early marine Rush will be harder, and will need a lot of micro. And thats good. The problem was that in short maps like steppes etc., the rushes were extremely effective and didnt need any micro at all.
Yes, but I was responding to someone who said that having large maps would totally nullify any early aggression, which is obviously false.
Just a few thoughts on maps but I'm sure there are some standard guidelines at Blizzard with regards to map design.
- Many of you mention "difficult to take 2nd expo" on many of these maps. I don't know if the answer is to simply have multiple expos behind the player - which removes a great deal of risk in expo'ing entirely. As to exactly how much "danger" a player should experience when taking a 3rd, seems to be an extremely subjective matter.
- gold expos which seem to be a point of contention, in my opinion I do agree that any gold expos should have some element of danger attached(otherwise why not just take it?) It makes sense to fight over gold resources, due to how game-deciding they can be.
- rush distances. I agree that longer distances encourage a macro-oriented game. Not sure if this means that small maps should be outlawed entirely. I think trying to please everyone is an impossible scenario.
EPT
I have hope that at least one or two will be legit. Awesome.
