|
These maps, with the exception of the new LT, are objectively worse than all the GSL maps (except Tal'Darim Altar).
The criticism is fair, because some maps have huge, obvious problems.
For example, it is impossible for a Zerg to do anything but one base on #3 against Protoss, because any 4-gate rush can infinitely block the unprotectable ramp while taking potshots at the expansion.
#4 has only 10 bases total... That's the same as Steppes of War, and the third is even harder to take than on that map. It's ridiculous also.
#2 and #5 are about the same average quality as the maps currently in the rotation, and wouldn't be awful if they made it to the pool, but certainly aren't an improvement.
|
They fixed Lost Temple to not be Imba for Terran anymore. Good stuff. (Coming from someone who mainst as T) Even I know that those cliff drops were deadly .
|
I'm most annoyed about the New LT.
I hate the fact that because people whined that they lost to cliff drops and Island expanders, they've just been removed. Creating a more boring and linear game experience. Because they have removed those features, blizzard won't put them into any other maps they make either. which is horrible because now maps are all going to slowly become very similar as any creativity or innovation is going to be met with whining and criticism to the point where they give in.
|
On February 06 2011 09:03 Exstasy wrote:
I'm most annoyed about the New LT.
I hate the fact that because people whined that they lost to cliff drops and Island expanders, they've just been removed. Creating a more boring and linear game experience. Because they have removed those features, blizzard won't put them into any other maps they make either. which is horrible because now maps are all going to slowly become very similar as any creativity or innovation is going to be met with whining and criticism to the point where they give in.
By having cliffs so close to a natural that a thor or tanks can snipe the expansion, it made that strategy far more powerful than any other on that map TvZ. And having one strategy that far outperforms any other on a map makes the matchup even more linear. Zerg, from the beginning of the game, had to do EVERYTHING with that cliff in mind.
Creativity should come from the players, not the maps. And making imbalanced maps dictates that the matchup will go in a certain direction more often than balanced maps where a number of different strategies are all very viable and powerful.
|
On February 06 2011 08:11 Ribbon wrote:
All I'm really saying is that Blizzard is doing their best to please everyone, with a significant but but exclusive focus towards the small minority here. I'm not saying don't criticize, but all the hatedom demanding Blizzard stop making maps altogether because they aren't pleasing us isn't really being fair to them.
Have you ever played wc3....ever?
The maps in wc3 stayed pretty much the same and were 99% pure garbage. I/we complain because in fact we know better. We know from EXPERIENCE that blizz has never been able to produce good maps (with the occasional exception). Therefore all the hate that they refuse to incorporate the gsl-maps or iccup-maps that are a million times better (even if not flawless obviously).
The maps not only look bad (have never played on them admittedly!) but they also seem to have been made very "cheaply"....they are quite the opposite of creative either, especially map 4.
|
I also don't like LT morphing into an open map...it was a fun map because of it's closed positions.
All in all, I prefer the GSL maps.
Like the closed air alley in test map 2...if we're going to be going for larger macro maps something has to be done about mutas, and corner spawns with the ground extending to the edge of the map (no cliff or chasm blocking pursuing AA units) is key to balancing big maps. In the present ladder maps there are just way too many safe air alleys beyond your natural spawns that make mutas too powerful IMO and forces the opposition to be somewhat 1-dimensional in their tech choices.
If we are going big maps (which is good) then we need very protected naturals to allow terran and toss to fast expand like zerg, else zerg will have an insane advantage.
I dislike the general trend that panders to zerg players to have more open maps...unit terrain/obstacles/cliffs creates diversity and fun game play and if zerg can't handle this then this should be a unit balance issue, not a map balance issue.
Would love to see blizzard come with race specific matchup maps..balancing for zerg just takes way too much creativity out of PvP, TvT, and PvT possibilities. Lot of cool things could be done with mirror match maps only...how about an island map like debris field in something like GSL for mirrors? That could be so cool watch...
|
eep was thinking how it would be to have a 3 ramps to natural with 2 blocked by rocks map today heh. Nice different gimmicks on every map, just like before. Wonder if zerg players will get annoyed by the new lt map as a terran can more easily take a 3rd now. and run by with hellions and marines, like on most maps.
As a zerg i would prefer dealing with the thor drop as its much cheaper to fend of. Well LT and Steppes are my favorite maps for all races, so i hope those stay ladder.
|
On February 06 2011 09:20 Fungal Growth wrote:
I also don't like LT morphing into an open map...it was a fun map because of it's closed positions.
All in all, I prefer the GSL maps.
Like the closed air alley in test map 2...if we're going to be going for larger macro maps something has to be done about mutas, and corner spawns with the ground extending to the edge of the map (no cliff or chasm blocking pursuing AA units) is key to balancing big maps. In the present ladder maps there are just way too many safe air alleys beyond your natural spawns that make mutas too powerful IMO and forces the opposition to be somewhat 1-dimensional in their tech choices.
If we are going big maps (which is good) then we need very protected naturals to allow terran and toss to fast expand like zerg, else zerg will have an insane advantage.
I dislike the general trend that panders to zerg players to have more open maps...unit terrain/obstacles/cliffs creates diversity and fun game play and if zerg can't handle this then this should be a unit balance issue, not a map balance issue.
Would love to see blizzard come with race specific matchup maps..balancing for zerg just takes way too much creativity out of PvP, TvT, and PvT possibilities. Lot of cool things could be done with mirror match maps only...how about an island map like debris field in something like GSL for mirrors? That could be so cool watch...
Gawd, unit balancing takes months and months to resolve ... they could probably pump out, test and produce some maps that balanced the races in a matter of weeks.
That's the big issue here. There's people playing tournaments with thousands of dollars at stake on shitty, shitty maps.
|
On February 06 2011 09:26 Defacer wrote:That's the big issue here. There's people playing tournaments with thousands of dollars at stake on shitty, shitty maps.
No disagreement there...
The cool thing with GOM doing their own maps (well for the most part) is they could in theory do their own unit balancing as well on a monthly basis. People forget that a large number of balance issues (not all) can be addressed with the unit map editor as long as people use your maps.
The ultimate solution is for blizzard to redesign their bnet interface so people can use custom maps... Right now custom maps are very impractical because you have go onto a chat and find people to play on your map which is a pain. The old system was better...display the most recent open games with a description, number of players, etc.. and one click and your in! So easy to find open games on custom it mystifies me why blizzard went to their current interface.
Stage 2 of blizzard's needed reform is to allow groups to form custom ladders... Say you have a GOM ladder which would have GOM maps only...you click to join a game and the system then best matches you with an available opponent of similar skill also wanting to play on the GOM maps.
Blizzard's main ladder could stay, but their map selection needs to be more democratic...maybe they could discard every week the map that was excluded the most and introduce a new map...in a way natural selection would then promote the best maps to the top. New maps could be introduced via the blizzard forums and voted upon for inclusion into the next open spot.
The big thing is blizzard has to allow community maps and community map matching to flourish...gamers are willing to invest their time for free to help improve their product and keep it fresh which blizzard should absolutely take advantage of to stay competitive against other RTS games.
|
WHY? Why is there always destructible rocks everywhere?
I can't believe these map makers, its like they are obliged to use them... Every single map has to have fucking rocks.
And those stupid watch towers, revealing all the middle of the map. WTF? Its like they don't want you to be able to flank the enemy... I think the towers are the worst new feature in this game compared to BW.
I am really dissapointed with these new maps.
|
There are destructible rocks everywhere because Blizzard balanced the game around 2-base play.
|
On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
For example, it is impossible for a Zerg to do anything but one base on #3 against Protoss, because any 4-gate rush can infinitely block the unprotectable ramp while taking potshots at the expansion.
When did people get this idea that Zerg cannot defend a 4-gate without static defenses at their natural? I have found that +1 speedlings can counter most forms of early 4-gates without the need for spine crawlers.
On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
#4 has only 10 bases total... That's the same as Steppes of War, and the third is even harder to take than on that map. It's ridiculous also.
10 bases is also the exact number of bases on Xel'Naga caverns, which is largely considered among the most popular and balanced maps.
|
On February 06 2011 09:17 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 08:11 Ribbon wrote:
All I'm really saying is that Blizzard is doing their best to please everyone, with a significant but but exclusive focus towards the small minority here. I'm not saying don't criticize, but all the hatedom demanding Blizzard stop making maps altogether because they aren't pleasing us isn't really being fair to them. Have you ever played wc3....ever?
Didn't care for it.
The maps in wc3 stayed pretty much the same and were 99% pure garbage. I/we complain because in fact we know better. We know from EXPERIENCE that blizz has never been able to produce good maps (with the occasional exception). Therefore all the hate that they refuse to incorporate the gsl-maps or iccup-maps that are a million times better (even if not flawless obviously).
The maps not only look bad (have never played on them admittedly!) but they also seem to have been made very "cheaply"....they are quite the opposite of creative either, especially map 4.
tl;dr: Blizzard sucks and should never do anything?
On February 06 2011 09:26 Defacer wrote:
Gawd, unit balancing takes months and months to resolve ... they could probably pump out, test and produce some maps that balanced the races in a matter of weeks.
IT'S JUST THAT EASY!
|
On February 06 2011 10:25 cosmo.6792 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
For example, it is impossible for a Zerg to do anything but one base on #3 against Protoss, because any 4-gate rush can infinitely block the unprotectable ramp while taking potshots at the expansion. When did people get this idea that Zerg cannot defend a 4-gate without static defenses at their natural? I have found that +1 speedlings can counter most forms of early 4-gates without the need for spine crawlers.
And how do you get enough speedlings to defend 4 gate from one base?
Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
#4 has only 10 bases total... That's the same as Steppes of War, and the third is even harder to take than on that map. It's ridiculous also. 10 bases is also the exact number of bases on Xel'Naga caverns, which is largely considered among the most popular and balanced maps.
Xel'Naga caverns also has a third and fourth base that are within shouting distance of the third. The map is completely ridiculous for competitive play.
|
On February 06 2011 02:01 Xain wrote:
Strange that Crota actually forgot to mention the small hallway between the 9 and 6 position and the 12 and 3 position... This is basically what make this map completely broken to me, instead of just inconfortable in close ground position (such as the 6 and 3 position).
I had a zerg make about 15 spinecrawlers and a few queens and lings and push through the rocks into my main. First game on the map.
|
On February 06 2011 10:47 ChThoniC wrote:
And how do you get enough speedlings to defend 4 gate from one base?
Who said anything about getting +1 speedlings off of only one base?
On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
Xel'Naga caverns also has a third and fourth base that are within shouting distance of the third. The map is completely ridiculous for competitive play.
Interesting, but I wasn't disputing the complaint that the 3rd expansion is difficult to defend. I was disputing the foolish belief that 10+ bases is some kind of requirement for good maps.
|
On February 06 2011 11:34 cosmo.6792 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 10:47 ChThoniC wrote:
And how do you get enough speedlings to defend 4 gate from one base?
Who said anything about getting +1 speedlings off of only one base? Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 08:42 ChThoniC wrote:
Xel'Naga caverns also has a third and fourth base that are within shouting distance of the third. The map is completely ridiculous for competitive play. Interesting, but I wasn't disputing the complaint that the 3rd expansion is difficult to defend. I was disputing the foolish belief that 10+ bases is some kind of requirement for good maps.
How do you get speedlings from 2 bases when your ramp constantly has forcefield on it?
You don't, and there's no way to prevent it because of the structure of the map. They are two objectively bad maps, and the current pool would be worse if they were included.
|
On February 06 2011 12:38 ChThoniC wrote:
How do you get speedlings from 2 bases when your ramp constantly has forcefield on it?
Are you saying it's not possible to get speedlings out of 2 bases before a 4-gate push starts?
|
On February 06 2011 13:20 cosmo.6792 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2011 12:38 ChThoniC wrote:
How do you get speedlings from 2 bases when your ramp constantly has forcefield on it?
Are you saying it's not possible to get speedlings out of 2 bases before a 4-gate push starts?
Are you saying you prevent 4-gate and apply pressure with pure speedling? What league are you in?
|
Hey, sorry for the stupid question but where do I download the PTR client from? The FAQs that the blog post refers to simply says that I should already have a file called "Starcraft II Public Test.exe" but not only can I not find this but since I'm on a Mac I'm pretty sure that I couldn't run this even if it turns out that I do have it. Can anyone help me out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
