|
On February 15 2011 13:47 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
I certainly don't expect the game to be perfectly balanced on these larger maps, and possibly less balanced than on the current map pool, but that is perfectly ok with me, as I think Blizzard will move towards balancing the game on these larger type maps, which is absolutely the direction the game should be moving right now, and I have no idea why Blizzard thought it would be a good idea to remove the large maps in the beta instead of balance the game for them.
With these larger maps, I think things like buffing siege tanks, giving hydra's a speed upgrade, and other much needed changes are more likely. Ultimately I think the game needs a supply cap increase, as maxed armies are simply pathetic as it is, but I don't think we can expect to see something that drastic until HOTS.
excuse me?? BUFFING them? care to elaborate?
|
Great to see, it was somewhat expected but seeing it confirmed is awesome.
|
On February 15 2011 18:12 Angelbelow wrote:
Slightly offtopic, but what were the bigger maps that blizzard took out during the beta? Would they be worth a revisit?
The beta map pool was pretty much identical to the current map pool except we had Desert Oasis and Kulas Ravine instead of Xel Naga Caverns and Shakuras Plateau. There was also a map called "Incineration Zone" that was quickly taken out during beta. Desert Oasis and Kulas Ravine weren't removed until well after the game's release.
Kulas Ravine can be considered to be a "macro" map, though it was also a universally hated map due to it's bad layout. Desert Oasis was just a strange map with a strange layout, though it produced some nice games (Jinro vs Socke at MLG Dallas). Incineration Zone was in the beta map pool for too short a time for any notable games to be played, though according to the layout it was definitely not a macro map.
I don't think Blizzard had actually taken out any macro maps besides Kulas Ravine, though that was a bad map.
Also, I'm sure the main reason that people are so tired with the current map pool is that many of our current maps were used since Day 1 of the Beta, and we are quickly approaching the 1 year anniversary for the start of the public beta. Also, some of our current maps (such as Lost Temple, Blistering Sands, and Scrap Station) were showcased extensively in prerelease preview matches, so it is quite understandable that many of the beta veterans are probably extremely pissed off at how slow the map pool has been evolving.
|
I enjoy watching the occasional all-in play that will not really be possible on the new maps.
DQ was really dumb but im kinda sad steppes and blistering are gone. Of course it's stupid when there is nothing but all-in play (bitByBit much?) but now we will see macro only and thats not for the better imho but we shall see...
|
Didn't watch the GSTL so don't know anything about the new maps except that they're bigger, looking forward to it.
|
On February 15 2011 19:03 plainsane wrote:
I enjoy watching the occasional all-in play that will not really be possible on the new maps.
DQ was really dumb but im kinda sad steppes and blistering are gone. Of course it's stupid when there is nothing but all-in play (bitByBit much?) but now we will see macro only and thats not for the better imho but we shall see...
You will probably see all-ins on these new maps that will be.."all-in" proxy 2gates, proxy racks, proxy starport banshee, 6pool etc. All-ins where you actually are at a disadvantage when they dont work are good for the game(none of this current close spawn metal/lt bunker rush/bring all scv stuff where youre still ahead if you dont win).
|
Expected but i am still happy that its confirmed
GOM is taking control and just doing it their own way, this means no more Stepps and the rest of the trash in the tournament.
|
I really don't see blizzard adding any maps to their map pool that they themselves didn't create. So at best maybe we see the original Crossfire?
|
Hmmm... oh well. At least it will be a change. They didn't have too much of a public test though.
|
Sweet! they had me really worried for a while there 
|
|
|
Sick! I really hope that Blizzard will add them to the ladder as well.
|
Very good decision on their part.
|
Personally I think GOM should completely eliminate the blizzard maps and design the whole map pool themselves. As it is right now NONE of blizzards maps are actually very good, some are just far worse than others. Although Xel/Metal/Shakuras might be balanced, they're not actually "good" maps. Would love to see how GOM would design small/medium sized maps.
|
On February 15 2011 19:13 vyyye wrote:
Didn't watch the GSTL so don't know anything about the new maps except that they're bigger, looking forward to it.
Off-topic, but I've gotta say the GSTL finals alone were easily worth the $5 cost. I'd highly recommend watching them if you've got the time and the cash. It also lets you get a peek at how these maps are going to play if you can't wait the whole 6 days before they show up in the GSL
|
I kept wondering how Blizzard would ever be aloud to buff Terran again...but now it becomes clear. The emphasis on 200/200 armies that these maps provide will put a hurtin' on Terrans.
|
Man, playing Steppes as a zerg makes me want to take a monitor and throw it out of the window..
The more maps are introduced, the more shitty maps will become history.
|
On February 15 2011 11:34 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
great news!
gsl4 will be grrrreat
gsl5 tho, but new maps are awesome
|
Good stuff.
Now Blizzard needs to step up and incorporate some of the big tournament maps (GSL as well as ICCup) into the ladder and it'll be perfect.
|
Wee sounds great. Even if the maps fail Gomtv will know what to change in order to make the game/maps more balanced .
Ps: time to enjoy more sun in south africa :D holidays rock
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
