|
Hello everyone, monitor from iCCup [aka Pawp] here.
As the thread title suggests, this thread is dedicated to the candidate maps to be used in the GSL.
All of these maps are a step up from current Blizzard maps, and it is a great initiative for the entire Starcraft 2 Community. Players are welcome to give their input on each map, and point out anything that has gone unnoticed (flaws).
Each map will include basic information including map size, total spawns, total bases, and any notable flaws. An overview will be provided, and below it is a short write up on Pro's and Con's found with each map. Keep in mind these are unorthodox maps from what you're used to seeing!
Tal'Darim Altar
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zDFd3.jpg)
- Players: 4
- Total expansions: 20
- Map Bounds: 176x176
- Notable flaws: Natural is tankable, doodads prevent natural wall off
From test games, this map is too big. Games result in turtle fests, favoring zerg, because they can drone until they see the opponent push, then make their entire army off 3 base (due to larvae inject). Long games can be fun, but this map shows to favor zerg inherently.
20 Bases is a lot for any map, especially when they're this spread out. Rush distances are very long, making players uncomfortable to move around the map. Little amounts harass (no cliffs) supports this turtle style play. This map could prove to be balanced, but right now its just too big for races to keep up with Zerg's macro.
Aiur Garden
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pmJeg.jpg)
- Players: 4
- Total expansions: 12
- Map Bounds: 156x156
- Notable flaws: None [so far]
This map is seen as the best of them all. The current issues are chokes and air. The natural is easy to hold, but the 3rd has no room for surrounds/flanks. It makes it difficult for a Zerg to hold a 3rd base against Protoss, especially with a proxy pylon.
Colossi get hit hard on this map, because air can catch them off guard almost anywhere. A player can fly his air units into the wasted space (unused space ie water) and kill colossi from a distance without jeopardizing ground attack. Air units can also harass the natural very easily, considering it is hard to maneuver, and the minerals face out.
Biohazard
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vPxmg.jpg)
- Players: 4
- Total expansions:16
- Map Bounds:143x132
- Notable flaws: Gas geysers glitch, terrain moves when built on
Biohazard is a bizarre map. The entire map seems to have random (noise) terrain, and moves when you build on it. Textures are rather ugly in-game, they're solid colors randomly put places. The entire thing seems somewhat sloppy, but has a unique feel to it.
The 3rd is unbelievably choked, making an aggressive third hard to take. The High Yield mineral only expansion is, from test games, seemingly too close to the 3rd. If you can hold the 3rd, you can hold the High Yield. Don't forget the 3rd is harass-able though!
Terminus Re
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/V3r5v.jpg)
- Players: 4
- Total expansions: 16
- Map Bounds: Unknown
- Notable flaws: None [yet]
This map has a very easy-to-take third with a high yield gas, so the main has a 2x ramp.
Crossfire
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/2/2c/Crossfire.jpg/405px-Crossfire.jpg)
- Players: 2
- Total expansions: 10
- Map Bounds: Unknown
- Notable flaws: None [yet]
Crossfire is a map by Blizzard, a direct port of Sin Peaks of Baekdu, which has been released for quite some time now. Currently, the 2x ramp out of the main seems unnecessary, especially considering the natural isn't able to be walled off.
The middle thirds are easy to hold, with the 1x ramp and they're very far out of the normal path. The entire maps is very choked, and can be awkward to fight on 2 base because of the High Ground cut off.
-------------------
Feel free to express you opinion, it could get put into the write-up section. If you found any notable flaws, say them here to be added.
Note: If we hear news a map has been removed from the candidates, we will update this thread.
|
I played a lot of games on Crossfire. If you want any sort of long macro game, it's the perfect map. Attacking is very dangerous so sometimes it can go to a 200/200 stalemate where both players do not with to give up their position.
|
On January 09 2011 08:19 monitor wrote:Hello everyone, monitor from iCCup [aka Pawp] here. As the thread title suggests, this thread is dedicated to the candidate maps to be used in the GSL.All of these maps are a step up from current Blizzard maps, and it is a great initiative for the entire Starcraft 2 Community. Players are welcome to give their input on each map, and point out anything that has gone unnoticed (flaws). Each map will include basic information including map size, total spawns, total bases, and any notable flaws. An overview will be provided, and below it is a short write up on Pro's and Con's found with each map. Keep in mind these unorthodox maps from what you're used to seeing!
Has GSL announced that they will be including their own set of custom maps? Did I miss something?
Conceptually, I like Tal'Darim Altar a lot, though it may be impractical to play on... Aiur Garden is really nice as well, but I'm wondering whether the backdoor expo has destructible rocks?
|
Excellent write up. Looking forward to how this develops in the future. Also the BW version of Sin Peaks of Baekdu features a low ground between two pairs of the six "peaks":
+ Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +
|
On January 09 2011 08:27 Omigawa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 08:19 monitor wrote:Hello everyone, monitor from iCCup [aka Pawp] here. As the thread title suggests, this thread is dedicated to the candidate maps to be used in the GSL.All of these maps are a step up from current Blizzard maps, and it is a great initiative for the entire Starcraft 2 Community. Players are welcome to give their input on each map, and point out anything that has gone unnoticed (flaws). Each map will include basic information including map size, total spawns, total bases, and any notable flaws. An overview will be provided, and below it is a short write up on Pro's and Con's found with each map. Keep in mind these unorthodox maps from what you're used to seeing! Has GSL announced that they will be including their own set of custom maps? Did I miss something? Conceptually, I like Tal'Darim Altar a lot, though it may be impractical to play on... Aiur Garden is really nice as well, but I'm wondering whether the backdoor expo has destructible rocks?
"GSL Code S progamer NSPGenius just posted a thread on PlayXP about GSL official map change.
According to NSPGenius, 4 bad maps will be pulled out from GSL official maps. Those 4 maps are Steppes of War, Delta Quadrant, Blistering Sands and unknown one. For replacement, 4 other maps will be used on GSL.
According to a reply from GSL staff, Gisado Star-Challenge is now testing new maps for next GSL season."
Thread seen here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=182734
|
On January 09 2011 08:30 monitor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 08:27 Omigawa wrote:On January 09 2011 08:19 monitor wrote:Hello everyone, monitor from iCCup [aka Pawp] here. As the thread title suggests, this thread is dedicated to the candidate maps to be used in the GSL.All of these maps are a step up from current Blizzard maps, and it is a great initiative for the entire Starcraft 2 Community. Players are welcome to give their input on each map, and point out anything that has gone unnoticed (flaws). Each map will include basic information including map size, total spawns, total bases, and any notable flaws. An overview will be provided, and below it is a short write up on Pro's and Con's found with each map. Keep in mind these unorthodox maps from what you're used to seeing! Has GSL announced that they will be including their own set of custom maps? Did I miss something? Conceptually, I like Tal'Darim Altar a lot, though it may be impractical to play on... Aiur Garden is really nice as well, but I'm wondering whether the backdoor expo has destructible rocks? " GSL Code S progamer NSPGenius just posted a thread on PlayXP about GSL official map change.
According to NSPGenius, 4 bad maps will be pulled out from GSL official maps. Those 4 maps are Steppes of War, Delta Quadrant, Blistering Sands and unknown one. For replacement, 4 other maps will be used on GSL.
According to a reply from GSL staff, Gisado Star-Challenge is now testing new maps for next GSL season." Thread seen here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=182734
Sorry,
I just saw the headline after replying 
But all of those maps are a step up from Steppes, Delta, and Blistering imo, although I would love to see a remake of Steppes that has a longer rush distance and maybe an extra expansion on each side, and minus the rocks at the northmost/southmost expansions. I think it would be a very solid map.
|
Aiur Garden is really good, the others are sorta meh. remove steppes imo for aiur and thats it.
|
Its too late for me to make a complete analysis, but here is a short summary of how I see the korean maps:
Maps are too big and have too many bases.
-Terrans cant play these maps. Its like playing ZvT on steppes and going 16hatch 15 pool.
-Juding from the games I have watched, a lot of games absolutly nothing happens unitl 12-14min.
Biohazard looks layout wise so weird, but somewhat interesting. The map is is pretty borderline distance wise but its possible id say.
If the all of these high grounds above the natural and third are actually pathable its terrible for obvious reasons.
I guess I dont need to say something about aesthetics.
I have seen a game where they used a different map. They might be randomly testing some until they find some good. I dont expect these to be final.
Even though I think its a great move to include custom maps in the GSL, the maps listed here are equally bad or worse than blizzard current ones.
Is it just me or does the korean mapping scene seem to be way behind the western one?
cheers,
madsquare
edited:
telling from google trans of the GSL staff reply on playxp, it seems they are intentionally looking for bigger maps to prevent cheese and short games.
Its still too late to elaborate why exactly, but I think most of us agree that huge maps are the wrong approach to address this problem?
|
Tbh I don't like Crossfire at all, one slight mistake by a zerg and Protoss can forcefield half the army for nothing.
|
Is it just me or does the korean mapping scene seem to be way behind the western one?
Keep in mind they haven't been in the game as long, so they have to catch up. Right now their maps are too big though.
|
Aiur Garden that is on EU is bugged. If you spawn top left corner, your natural (the down from your base, not the back door expo) has a weird SCV bug. If your SCV doesn't acquire a mineral patch and bounces around looking for one, it moves into the main and sits at the top of the hill. It's as if there looking for an 8th patch and then getting confused that theres only 7.
Don't know if its EU specific or who to report it to? I have replay if required.
EDIT: the map uploaded on EU is different and has an extra base, its this extra one that is bugged. So I think this can be ignored (except by the uploader who should update it  )
|
United States7166 Posts
if it is indeed true that zerg is too strong on these large maps, then that's only because blizzard's been balancing their game around their mostly small sized maps. i personally think the game should then be rebalanced around these larger-than-blizz maps as i still think larger sized maps are better for the game overall.
|
On January 09 2011 09:38 Zelniq wrote:
if it is indeed true that zerg is too strong on these large maps, then that's only because blizzard's been balancing their game around their mostly small sized maps. i personally think the game should then be rebalanced around these larger-than-blizz maps as i still think larger sized maps are better for the game overall.
hmm, its a good point but i think maybe just choking up some areas could make it harder for zerg.
|
On January 09 2011 09:38 Zelniq wrote:
if it is indeed true that zerg is too strong on these large maps, then that's only because blizzard's been balancing their game around their mostly small sized maps. i personally think the game should then be rebalanced around these larger-than-blizz maps as i still think larger sized maps are better for the game overall.
The only issue with large maps is the Queen design.
Creep makes longer games easier and easier to control the map. With long rush distances, zerg unit speed on creep is exponentially faster than other races on big maps (because of rush distance). Creep spread wouldn't necessarily have to change to balance late game, but inject would.
Inject on three base allows a Zerg to drone until the enemy pushes, then make a 200/200 army. They can then rebuild their army before the opponent gets to them. Zerg is just too powerful on big maps, especially when they get to 4 base.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
I think GSL can get way better maps to replace those they aren't satisfied with.
|
United States7166 Posts
also it's not practical to think that zerg can just make their entire army once they see enemy move out. for example in zvt, zerg needs to have a standing army already to deal with drops, but more importantly to not let tanks get free reign to move all the way up to zerg's base and siege up before any threat of zerg units.
and in general for all matchups, zerg's method of destroying a maxed army is to fight and lose most or all their units, but remax or reproduce a ton of units with saved larva. if your first fight is just outside your base then theyre too close to you and will suffer too much damage, you want to engage as far away as possible.
as for doing this in this earlier on like in the midgame (say around 7-10 minutes), stalling units for more drones, this is already happening and it's generally agreed upon athat zerg has to/should be doing this by the top players
wait i just re-read monitor's last post..are you saying the maps are so big that zerg can see an army moving out, start making a 200/200 army, lose it, then remax again to 200 before enemy makes it to your base? i find that hard to believe, and also strange that a game would get to such a weird point. what did the zerg have like 7000+ total resources saved up in these games youre speaking of?
|
Well obviously, you won't be making your entire army from nothing but you stilll need less of a standing army before he pushes out.
|
On January 09 2011 10:31 Zelniq wrote:
also it's not practical to think that zerg can just make their entire army once they see enemy move out. for example in zvt, zerg needs to have a standing army already to deal with drops, but more importantly to not let tanks get free reign to move all the way up to zerg's base and siege up before any threat of zerg units.
and in general for all matchups, zerg's method of destroying a maxed army is to fight and lose most or all their units, but remax or reproduce a ton of units with saved larva. if your first fight is just outside your base then theyre too close to you and will suffer too much damage, you want to engage as far away as possible.
as for doing this in this earlier on like in the midgame (say around 7-10 minutes), stalling units for more drones, this is already happening and it's generally agreed upon athat zerg has to/should be doing this by the top players
wait i just re-read monitor's last post..are you saying the maps are so big that zerg can see an army moving out, start making a 200/200 army, lose it, then remax again to 200 before enemy makes it to your base? i find that hard to believe, and also strange that a game would get to such a weird point. what did the zerg have like 7000+ total resources saved up in these games youre speaking of?
I think what monitor is trying to say is that they can do that in the early/mid game which sets them up to have a brutally advanced economy in the late game so that they can start throwing away 200/200 armies. That is exactly the problem we ran into on Enigma and why it was cut from the monthly map pool.
|
On January 09 2011 10:31 Zelniq wrote:
also it's not practical to think that zerg can just make their entire army once they see enemy move out. for example in zvt, zerg needs to have a standing army already to deal with drops, but more importantly to not let tanks get free reign to move all the way up to zerg's base and siege up before any threat of zerg units.
and in general for all matchups, zerg's method of destroying a maxed army is to fight and lose most or all their units, but remax or reproduce a ton of units with saved larva. if your first fight is just outside your base then theyre too close to you and will suffer too much damage, you want to engage as far away as possible.
as for doing this in this earlier on like in the midgame (say around 7-10 minutes), stalling units for more drones, this is already happening and it's generally agreed upon athat zerg has to/should be doing this by the top players
wait i just re-read monitor's last post..are you saying the maps are so big that zerg can see an army moving out, start making a 200/200 army, lose it, then remax again to 200 before enemy makes it to your base? i find that hard to believe, and also strange that a game would get to such a weird point. what did the zerg have like 7000+ total resources saved up in these games youre speaking of?
Hmmm.. I did do a rather bad job explaining my reasoning. Note that this balance issue is only apparent on gigantic maps (144x144+).
The basic idea is:
On a map with long rush distances, no cliff harass, and close expansions (like Tal'Darim Altar), a Zerg on 3+ bases can reproduce their army too fast.
----
Two base Zerg can make enough units to fend off early attacks. Then they take their 3rd. With three easy-to-hold bases and long distances, they can safely drone as long as they scout+defend harass. When they scout the full Terran army pushing, they can make their own army from stockpiled larvae and have it ready in time for attack.
This is generally how Zerg works, but on big maps combined with creep (to provide vision and speeds up rush distance) this is amplified. Terran and Protoss can't keep up with Zerg's ability to macro.
edit//: This.
I think what monitor is trying to say is that they can do that in the early/mid game which sets them up to have a brutally advanced economy in the late game so that they can start throwing away 200/200 armies. That is exactly the problem we ran into on Enigma and why it was cut from the monthly map pool.
|
If you guys would like to see games on the maps then go to http://www.gomtv.com/game/
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/EsztG.jpg)
Click on that then the title of the vid or thumbnail of the vid.
When you press play you will need to install something, it takes a few seconds, press the button on the left.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/SLo1H.jpg)
Low and high quality vids 
btw when you play a vid, you will have to watch 4-5 ads, then you will see the game, then 4 or 5 more then another one.
|
On January 09 2011 10:55 NexUmbra wrote:If you guys would like to see games on the maps then go to http://www.gomtv.com/game/+ Show Spoiler +Click on that then the title of the vid or thumbnail of the vid. When you press play you will need to install something, it takes a few seconds, press the button on the left. + Show Spoiler +Low and high quality vids btw when you play a vid, you will have to watch 4-5 ads, then you will see the game, then 4 or 5 more then another one.
Thx for the explaination, got there pretty easy, watching one of them now!
|
i get some pop up to install a plugin. installing it doesn't work for me.
|
|
|
|
|
The version of Aiur Gardens that's on the U.S. server has a base just outside the main that's not present in your overview picture, bringing the total to 16.
Also, Aiur Gardens has destructible rocks at every expo but the backdoor nats, and those aren't in your picture.
Likewise, Tal'Darim Altar has rocks at the thirds.
After getting together with some friends and playing some games on all of these, I like all three of them quite a lot personally. All three races will NEED to FE on Tal'Darim Altar, but a good 2-base push, taking a third behind it, should prevent a Zerg from getting too insanely far ahead. Having all so many of the expos blocked by rocks on Aiur Gardens is a bit awkward- so far it's my least favorite of the three, but it's still quite good. And Biohazard, despite being ugly as hell, has produced really nice games every time I've seen it in action.
EDIT- Also, you didn't mention this, but the "blue" thirds on Biohazard only have 6 mineral patches each.
|
On January 09 2011 12:20 Barrin wrote:
I'm more interested in how this might bode for us non-korean mapmakers. Does this mean Blizz will be less likely to put our maps in the map pool (in the future tbh)?
TBH, I was really worried at first, but now that I think about it more I'm not worried at all really. First off, I think we can do better (and a select few of us already have IMO). Also, these maps seem incredibly complicated (which is actually something that I like), but that's exactly why Blizzard would hesitate to implement them in the map pool. Remember when they said they don't want ladder maps to be too complicated because noobs have to play on them too?
I don't know though. what do you guys think?
yeah i think aiur gardens is actually really good, but those other maps are not even close to some of the maps that this community has. // biohazard could be great but it needs a makeover. i dont think blizzard will be open to too much when it comes to ladder, at least not for a while. and they wont make any because they probably need to make 40+ for HotS.
|
Looks like we will get some nice Brood War-esque macro games on these maps, which is what everyone wants, right? Apparently, the more expos someone takes in GSL, the more people approve of that particular match. I am quite excited to see what kind of insane macro games are produced from these maps, especially from the macro gods like NaDa, Ret, Jinro, and others.
Hopefully, the large sizes will stress a greater importance on harassment, which also draws in viewers, as well as a decreased emphasis on the one-control-group syndrome. When these maps are adopted by more of the community, I hope to see a much higher level of play compared to now.
|
Awesome! Thanks!!
This totally rules. Been waiting forever to see some decent games on
new maps.
This new pool looks great so far. I like that first one with the TvP on metal
tileset ... reminds me of Andromeda.
.
.
|
i'm really really really happy gsl decided to add new maps, and i know these are only candidates, BUT i hope they try out more and better maps because these don't look too interesting and some of them are quite big
i would be freaking happy if you guys (iccup) presented your maps to gisado so they could test them out, i mean, imagine GSL 5 finals on Testbug??!?!!? who doesn't like that map?!
iccup maps are fun, they are very good looking and promote all kinds of playstyles
|
Totally agree with predy, iccup contact them if you haven't already
also there is one more map if you still don't know
Terminus Re
|
On January 09 2011 19:21 Dia wrote:Totally agree with predy, iccup contact them if you haven't already also there is one more map if you still don't know Terminus Re
Well what one is that replacing? :O
Or just a new one? not a replace? :O
|
"it seems they are intentionally looking for bigger maps to prevent cheese and short games."
it seems blizz and every other platform of sc2 wants the spectator factor to be higher than the progamers factor...mmmm, how not weird at all
edited typos
|
All of these maps seem kinda gimmickey such as the current Blizz maps. Backdoors, in-base naturals, far-away thirds.
|
On January 09 2011 21:16 baskerville wrote:
"it seems they are intentionally looking for bigger maps to prevent cheese and short games."
it seems blizz and every other platform of sc2 wants the spectator factor to be higher than the progamers factor...mmmm, how not weird at all
edited typos So you think that progamers want cheesy and short games?
|
On January 09 2011 21:06 NexUmbra wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 19:21 Dia wrote:Totally agree with predy, iccup contact them if you haven't already also there is one more map if you still don't know Terminus Re Well what one is that replacing? :O Or just a new one? not a replace? :O
Remember that these maps are just candidates for replacement.
|
Weavel
= i'm saying it's favoring 100 food finishes at the least, to get spectators exited
progamers want maps that allow as many strategies possible at the start and that are fair with the three races (at said start and until end game, + Show Spoiler +the mid game can be up for grabs though
Barrin quote:
"Also, these maps seem incredibly complicated (which is actually something that I like), but that's exactly why Blizzard would hesitate to implement them in the map pool. Remember when they said they don't want ladder maps to be too complicated because noobs have to play on them too?
I don't know though. what do you guys think?"
= +1 for liking complicated maps
blizz is going in on an impossible task trying to figure out how to do both on one map, mostly for the starting player, but + Show Spoiler + also for the spectator factor
Dia Slovenia
= so at least one should be good, no?
|
On January 09 2011 10:49 monitor wrote:
Two base Zerg can make enough units to fend off early attacks. Then they take their 3rd. With three easy-to-hold bases and long distances, they can safely drone as long as they scout+defend harass. When they scout the full Terran army pushing, they can make their own army from stockpiled larvae and have it ready in time for attack.
This is generally how Zerg works, but on big maps combined with creep (to provide vision and speeds up rush distance) this is amplified. Terran and Protoss can't keep up with Zerg's ability to macro.
I think that T and P players just have to use more eco oriented build orders to adapt to those maps. Right now, TvZ and PvZ is a lot about timing pushes, which is one of the reasons why the games are often boring. Timing pushes should become as rare as pure cheese games, with straight up macro games replacing them.
I believe it's too early to say that "Terran and Protoss can't keep up with Zerg's ability to macro". We feel that way because zergs are already trying to macro as hard as possible every game, because they don't really have an offensive option. T and P haven't really tried the pure eco builds yet, like double nexus, which was standard on some BW maps.
And otherwise I'm completely with zelniq: if the giant maps really turn out to be imbalanced, then the game should be rebalanced for them. Although I am afraid that Blizz won't be able to do that. That was the big fear that I (and some others) already voiced during the early beta.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50121 Posts
Aiur Gardens seems fine...the far away third seems like an issue,but I think its used to control zergs from going crazy with expanding.Its still 3 base with 2 chokes and defender's advantage of having the high ground.
|
I love Tal'Darim Altar! So many expos and no stupid rocks blocking them. Love it!
|
On January 09 2011 21:41 baskerville wrote:
Dia Slovenia
= so at least one should be good, no?
Yep, at least one. Genius said they will replace 5... dunno how many for real
|
in this game especially it's silly to care to much about from were tanks can shoot. I mean how you can say that tanks can shoot the expand is a flaw while the map is zerg favored? Mech on a huge map is not viable tvp so...
Further, do you only consider tanks or collossus as well?
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50121 Posts
On January 09 2011 22:07 sashkata wrote:
I love Tal'Darim Altar! So many expos and no stupid rocks blocking them. Love it!
every expo except for the nats are blocked by rocks according to what people say.
|
On January 09 2011 22:23 BLinD-RawR wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 22:07 sashkata wrote:
I love Tal'Darim Altar! So many expos and no stupid rocks blocking them. Love it! every expo except for the nats are blocked by rocks according to what people say.
oh they are not displayed on the map picture on tl. I think it's here to prevent zerg to mass expand too easily
|
|
|
I always wondered why they never had Rich Vespene Geysers. The Terrazine Gas mission in campaign kinda indicated to me that it was implemented, but then removed. Good to see these might be added to GSL
|
On January 10 2011 01:30 DarthXX wrote:I always wondered why they never had Rich Vespene Geysers. The Terrazine Gas mission in campaign kinda indicated to me that it was implemented, but then removed. Good to see these might be added to GSL
Workers came out on wrong side of the rich vespene geysers until recently, so thats why we haven't used them.
|
On January 10 2011 01:30 DarthXX wrote:I always wondered why they never had Rich Vespene Geysers. The Terrazine Gas mission in campaign kinda indicated to me that it was implemented, but then removed. Good to see these might be added to GSL
They are in the map editor, just not used in any actual maps from Blizz (no idea if any customs use them).
You can easily add them to maps though.
|
These maps are a very interesting choice of maps. Auir Gardens is definitely my favorite, and I dislike the other two. Biohazard is just... weird. I don't like where the thirds and high yields are. Tal'Darim Altar is huge and Zerg favored. Crossfire and Terminus RE are very good maps. Terminus RE might not be good gameplay wise because of the easy third, but I like that idea.
|
On January 10 2011 01:33 monitor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2011 01:30 DarthXX wrote:I always wondered why they never had Rich Vespene Geysers. The Terrazine Gas mission in campaign kinda indicated to me that it was implemented, but then removed. Good to see these might be added to GSL Workers came out on wrong side of the rich vespene geysers until recently, so thats why we haven't used them.
Interesting, I'm curious as to what the best method for implementing these would be. I can't imagine having both high yield minerals and gas at 1 expo, or maybe it would work as it would be a much higher priority target.
|
On January 09 2011 21:32 Weavel wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2011 21:16 baskerville wrote:
"it seems they are intentionally looking for bigger maps to prevent cheese and short games."
it seems blizz and every other platform of sc2 wants the spectator factor to be higher than the progamers factor...mmmm, how not weird at all
edited typos So you think that progamers want cheesy and short games?
almost all of bw iccup maps had destructible or resource blocked areas, yet no one complains about that...
|
I checked out all the maps and I LOVE it. they have a very slick professional, structured feel. do we know if the mapmakers were bw mapmakers?
really ++++++ 10/10. huge step forward in terms of depth and professionalism.
|
What we need ARE bigger maps, but testing has shown that the larve mechanic makes it too easy for a zerg to drone hard then make an army when he needs to. Does this mean the overall game balance is decided by how big or small a map is? That seems rediculous to me that SC2's balance is based on the maps. If more big maps are introduced into the ladder pool, will blizzard have to tweak the way zergs macro works? Will they keep it the same and figure a few small maps in the pool will balance that out?
The more I think about it, the more angry I get at the way SC2 was balanced, the balancing was all done in alpha/beta with the same maps we see now! That means that a new map thrown in the pool that is too big might throw off the careful balance blizzard has been working towards. VERY INTERESTING INDEED.
|
On January 10 2011 03:27 emc wrote:
What we need ARE bigger maps, but testing has shown that the larve mechanic makes it too easy for a zerg to drone hard then make an army when he needs to. Does this mean the overall game balance is decided by how big or small a map is? That seems rediculous to me that SC2's balance is based on the maps. If more big maps are introduced into the ladder pool, will blizzard have to tweak the way zergs macro works? Will they keep it the same and figure a few small maps in the pool will balance that out?
The more I think about it, the more angry I get at the way SC2 was balanced, the balancing was all done in alpha/beta with the same maps we see now! That means that a new map thrown in the pool that is too big might throw off the careful balance blizzard has been working towards. VERY INTERESTING INDEED.
That's what happens when you balance the game off a small selection of (also small) maps. But as pointed out earlier, T/P econ builds havn't really been explored much as the timing pushes are much more effective.
|
The problem is, that these balance fixes lie far beyond what mappers can achieve.
We are talking about the very fundamentals of the game. This is something that was screwed up by blizzard and it cant be changed to easily. It would require another beta and all that things.
That is the reason why SC2 is the way it is.
Maybe it will be changed with HotS but I wouldnt bet on it.
I dont see it as too problematic however. There have been several good games, and there is a distance (its pretty close to meta cross pos) that you can hit to make cheese less attractive but possible.
I think we are actually fine concerning maps and rush distance with what the TL community has produced. The problem are blizz maps like jungle basin, steppes, Delta quadrant that have insanly short distances. These can be dealt with however - by replacing them with better suited maps.
cheers,
madsquare.
|
it makes me angry when i see a map like Crossfire... its basically Peaks of Baekdu
|
On January 10 2011 04:15 NastyMarine wrote:
it makes me angry when i see a map like Crossfire... its basically Peaks of Baekdu
Its Sin Peaks of Baekdu, indeed.
|
My one gripe is with Aiur Garden because creep does not reach far enough to sunken the ramp to your main.
|
On January 09 2011 21:16 baskerville wrote:
"it seems they are intentionally looking for bigger maps to prevent cheese and short games."
it seems blizz and every other platform of sc2 wants the spectator factor to be higher than the progamers factor...mmmm, how not weird at all
edited typos
More spectators= more money for progamers.
|
I don't think we should say that larger maps are zerg imba until we experiment with them for a long time. We still have much to learn about SC2.
One thing to consider is the supply ratio of works to army will be an important strategic decision to make. It seems many players in SC2 think that no amount of workers is too many, but I think larger maps will help us to understand where this balance may lie.
|
I feel the problem with zerg lies not with the inject mechanic. Let's face it, there were no queens to inject in SC BW, how did players compensate? THey made more hatcheries. The problem IMO is that zerg units cost way too much supply, which in turn allows you to produce ur 140food worth of units in 1 production cycle. in SCBW the ultralisk took up like 4 supply (I think?) now its 6, Hydra's move from 1-2 and roaches cost a flat 2 in fact the only 1 supply units zerg has are zerglings and drones. I feel if you adjusted these values down a bit and maybe weakened the units and cheapened the cost to compensate zerg would not nearly be so strong on huge maps. Also would bring the zerg back to feeling, you know zergy.
|
Are there any replays of good players playing on those maps? Or even youtube VODs?
The korean GomTV site doesnt load for me...
|
Hi I'm playing in the SEA server and would like to upload these maps into the server so that more people worldwide can have fun and play with them.
Can anyone tell me how?
Thanks!
|
Aiur Garden looks awesome. Tal'Darim Altar seems to have way too many doodads except in the middle. It could stand to lose an expansion on each of the corners and 2 of the 4 gold ones in the middle. 14 expansions is more reasonable than 20 and let it still stand as the most macro map in the pool. Making the pathways less winding but keeping some of the chokes could reduce the rush distance since the map is really large.
The bright light blue color in the NW and SW of Biohazard is just too much of an eyesore to me. It just really strains the eyes looking at it.
|
I want to see something like stacked temples on medusa, that was an interesting mechanic, it should also have been used on Burning Sands, as is, that map is terrible because the backdoor is too easy to take down.
Otherwise I'm pumped for new maps, the current pool has gotten old.
|
There is a problem on Biohazard, those 3 minerals on the 7 o'clock natural actually trapped my mule :< ... probably a nice place to drop marines vs zergs early game aswell
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/AS4gB.jpg)
|
I really dont like any of those maps, while Aiurs garden is the best of them, most ICCup maps are just way better.
Doesnt GomTV want to consider ICCup maps, too? :-(
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/6_Sin%20Peaks%20of%20Baekdu.jpg)
