I don't think I've ever had a game on that map that has gone past 3 bases. Whether I kill them before 3 bases or they kill me before 3 bases. Allows for way too much aggression to make for diverse games on it.

Abidus

Belgium8 Posts

January 25 2014 23:24 GMT

#22

I'm open to a map change, add some rocks browder! I'd be very interested to see some new rock placement though not the ramp, like in the hole next to the mineral line and another one at the cliff edge near the ramp so that walling to your nexus requires less buildings but we keep an interesting open entrance to the natural. Early pools would also get a new dimension to kill rocks to make room for a follow up all-in.

Edit: Like so http://imgur.com/516OUm5
Sorry for the size but couldn't find a bigger picture of Daedalus.

Chiyosuke

United States51 Posts

January 26 2014 00:23 GMT

#23

I like playing on maps that aren't too standard like this. Makes players really think about strategies and how to adjust to strong builds.

jekku

Canada1640 Posts

January 26 2014 05:21 GMT

#24

I'm ok with it on ladder but should never be used at tournaments.

Pandain

United States12989 Posts

January 26 2014 07:07 GMT

#25

Not from the map pool maybe, but definitely from WCS

felisconcolori

United States6168 Posts

January 26 2014 07:20 GMT

#26

Keep it in the pool. If nothing else, it should force Protoss players to come up with better openings rather than the same "wall the natural" that's been going since someone said "FFE or die trying".

Is it great for Protoss the way we've all been playing it since it became okay to expand after the beta? No. Is it absolutely insurmountable? I don't know. I'm not a professional player - maybe someone can figure out something new.

+ Show Spoiler +

I'm open to the idea that, no, there's no way. But since not every race needs to wall off, maybe Protoss can find a way to be safe and not wall off too. They do have some pretty strong tools at their disposal, between FF and Photon Overcharge. I just don't know enough of Protoss at that level, and I don't know that anyone has been really looking. After all, DP can be veto'd into oblivion in most tournaments and wide ramps aren't the norm.

Drake

Germany6146 Posts

January 26 2014 11:33 GMT

#27

no because i hate whiners

trada

Germany347 Posts

January 26 2014 15:23 GMT

#28

I dont even remember that map

banjoetheredskin

United States744 Posts

January 26 2014 19:39 GMT

#29

I'm inclined to think it wouldn't be as much of a problem if there was a way to veto it in GSL. I think looking beyond PvZ though, it's not that good of a map still in my opinion. The huge ramp causes different problems for all races in each matchup, and I think that while it might encourage some innovative play, the apparent imbalance in some matchups outweighs that positive.

vhapter

Brazil677 Posts

January 26 2014 20:47 GMT

#30

Of course. If you have a veto system, it's -1 veto for protoss (and I suppose terran too). It's not fair to be forced to veto a map because a matchup on it is pretty much impossible to win. Sure, it was funny to see some protoss players wall off the zerg's main instead of their own ramp, but I mean... this map is trash. That just goes to show how hopeless protoss players are on this map, basically nothing is viable.

It's high time Blizzard looked for map features that improve gameplay without making things completely imbalanced. They try way too many tweaks to encourage different tactics/strategies that people aren't interested in, but if something turns out to be poowerful, everybody whine about such metagame change. I love how maps had a huge impact on strategy/tactics in wc3. They could even be used to balance things to a certain extent, and you could even tweak your own patterns and builds to your liking. But all I see in sc2 is Blizzard coming up with retarded maps that make the map pool worse each season. I wish they would start developing wc4, because apparently all they can do is make sc2 worse nowadays.

imre

France9263 Posts

January 26 2014 21:59 GMT

#31

so many ppl liking the fact 1race is up 1-0 on a bo3 lol

sixfour

England11062 Posts

January 27 2014 06:56 GMT

#32

On January 25 2014 05:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:
No!
Crazy maps are fun!

basically this. unless the map is fundamentally imbalanced, if you can't adapt your game to something other than daybreak v27.0, then try doing so rather than crying about it.

Shuffleblade

Sweden1903 Posts

January 27 2014 09:20 GMT

#33

I've posted this before but I do think diversity is the name of the game, sc2 is getting stale because its currently lacking diversity and is having too strong of a meta right now. While people whine about sc2 "dead game" while also in the same breath rages at blizzard for daring to "actually change things"...... Its just so hard to understand, if you don't think that SC2 is in a good place right now then don't complain when Blizz is changing things up.

Maps are made to encourage different play and strategic choices on different maps, at this time the maps do not really force that but its probably what we need for the scene. I do think its unfair for it to be in the pool of code A this fast without letting players have time to actually get used to it but I also don't think its good to put it in a place where its just auto vetoed.

Myself I'm a scrub gold-plat level player but I've never vetoed a map on ladder, thats because I know that just playing within my comfort zone and removing the sitautions I have the most problems with won't help my growth as a player.
Keep the map and make even more outrageus ones please, if there is a map where one race is totally unbeatable that should logically be mostly a balance issue and not a map issue.

ethox

Finland57 Posts

January 27 2014 09:58 GMT

#34

What is the purpose of new maps? They are brought in because the old ones are figured out and stale. When new maps are presented, people have tons of fun trying to find out the most effective openers on the map, might find some great tactical assets and abuse them before the rest of the crowd catches on. But if the new map tries to imitate the old one, this really can't happen. Ever. Which brings up to the MSC 3-basing turtle toss, but I don't want to sound like a douche or an expert, since I'm really neither.

Grumbels

Netherlands7032 Posts

January 27 2014 12:45 GMT

#35

I don't think that you can use narrow ramps for several years and balance the game around that and then expect to be fine when you have a map with a wider ramp. That's like having a map without a close-by natural expansion and saying that people shouldn't care about balance issues that pop up.

Shuffleblade

Sweden1903 Posts

January 27 2014 12:52 GMT

#36

On January 27 2014 21:45 Grumbels wrote:
I don't think that you can use narrow ramps for several years and balance the game around that and then expect to be fine when you have a map with a wider ramp. That's like having a map without a close-by natural expansion and saying that people shouldn't care about balance issues that pop up.

They don't balance the game around that, the players tailor their playstyle according to that. What, you think marines would do more/less damage if it was a wider ramp at release on most maps? =P

3clipse

Canada2555 Posts

January 27 2014 13:25 GMT

#37

Voted no, both because I like a somewhat diverse map pool and because, lets face it, it is a fantastic zerg map.

Apfelfrisch

Germany2 Posts

January 27 2014 14:39 GMT

#38

On January 27 2014 21:52 Shuffleblade wrote:

Show nested quote +

They don't balance the game around that, the players tailor their playstyle according to that. What, you think marines would do more/less damage if it was a wider ramp at release on most maps? =P

I would expect that Blizzard is more creative than that, maybe the Bunker has lager range etc. but the maps have shurely a bearing on the balance.

Thor.Rush

Sweden702 Posts

January 27 2014 14:49 GMT

#39

As a terran, I enjoy playing against zerg on this map. Going CC first and hoping the zerg will make lots of speedlings that I can roast =)

Shuffleblade

Sweden1903 Posts

January 27 2014 15:13 GMT

#40

On January 27 2014 23:39 Apfelfrisch wrote:

Show nested quote +

I would expect that Blizzard is more creative than that, maybe the Bunker has lager range etc. but the maps have shurely a bearing on the balance.

You got it the wrong way around, I doubt Blizz goes "hmm zerg is too strong on daedelous so I guess we boost attack range and damage on photon cannon" =P Blizz don't do balance patches based around a specific map but if you see the same problem consistently throughout many maps they might because then its a general balance issue and not a map issue. Herp derp 9pool doesn't work effectively on Alterzim Stronghold against P please balance patch....

Players adapt their builds to the maps and use what tools they have and a map without a close-by natural expansion sounds like a decent idea to stir up the meta good thought. The problems that would appear wojuld however not be balance related they would be "people figuring out what builds work against what" oriented.