The scouting distance is so short it's not just possible, it's viable (at low-mid level play).

Not to mention, the ramp is significantly far away from the creep in Zerg's main.

DL_henu

Finland10 Posts

July 26 2011 11:36 GMT

#44

Well they removed all the maps i had voted down + meta. Interesting to see how the new maps play out.

SockArms

United States591 Posts

July 26 2011 11:53 GMT

#45

did some comp stomping on these maps with some friends just to get the feel for them

is it jsut me or is the main on Antiga Shipyard really really small.

it won't hurt me to bad as a Zerg player but i feel it'll get over crowded with buildings for terran and protoss.

Xadar

497 Posts

July 26 2011 12:58 GMT

#46

On July 26 2011 06:31 graNite wrote:
I already played a few TvZs at Searing Crater.
It's so easy to siege in front of the zergs natural, behind the wall.
Zerg can do nothing about it.

Will definitly not vote it

)

You will get very few tvz on that map, cause nearly every zerg is gonna veto it (including me)

Archvil3

Denmark989 Posts

July 26 2011 13:34 GMT

#47

Nerazim Crypt

Aight, first map to slaughter. I find this map to be extremely imbalanced, not as much racialy imbalanced as I think that it is positionaly imbalanced. If you are going to make a rotational symetry map the most important bit is to make sure that it's as good to spawn clockwise from your opponent as it is to spawn counter clockwise. A map I think is actually pretty bad because of this is tal'darim altar because of how difficult it can be to get a fourth in some positions and how easy it is to siege your opponents natural if you as terran spawn clockwise from your opponent. Still Tal'darim is not half as bad as Nerazim Crypt. Spawning counter clockwise from your opponent will give you an easy third while the clockwise spawn will easily be forced to stay on 2 bases. The third will be so hard and awkward to defend.

I am personally not a huge fan of rotational symetry because of so many potential imbalances that you got to take into account that you dont have to worry about in other styles of maps. And if you are going to make one anyway you better know what the fuck you are doing.

Searing Crater

The layout is potentially good but in its current shape it is pretty terrible. The major flaws is the short rushdistance(anyone got analyzer pics of this already, not sure how bad it is exactly) and the really awkward natural. The ramp is poorly positioned, the mineral line can be sieged from the lowground and the 2 paths into it makes it impossible defend both the ramp and the mineral line. In TvZ this is going to be an absolute nightmare for the zerg player. Quite a shame really, with a better rush distance and a less stupid natural this could have been a good map.

Antiga Shipyard

I actually like this map a lot. Dunno about siege tanks from main to the third but it looks like the distance is long enough to not be an issue. The gold bases are kinda useless but I dont think it is a problem balance wise. Definetly the best of the 4 new maps.

Abyssal Caverns

I umm well ehhhh, getting tirred og this now. Vertical and cross positions are probally playable, dunno how they imagine anyone should expand beyond your natural in horisontal positions. A few changes could make this a decent map I guess but by the looks of it now, it is garbage.

So which maps to downvote? I play zerg so Searing Crater can GTFO. Nerazim Crypt, Abyssal Caverns and Shattered Temple have a chance of spawning in really bad positions while you can still get lucky and spawn in good positions and get a decent game out of it. Backwater Gulch and Typhon Peaks got some pretty bad flaws as well that I dont like as zerg, so I dont know, wish I could downvote all the maps I mentioned.

kodas

United States418 Posts

July 26 2011 13:50 GMT

#48

I'm debating on whether to veto the new maps just to avoid the numerous amount of TvT there will be since all the Zergs will veto it.

dlcofls21

71 Posts

July 26 2011 15:13 GMT

#49

As a Zerg, I will be down voting Gulch, Abyssal caverns, and searing crater, I would like to veto Crypt but

...

OhMyGawd

United States264 Posts

July 26 2011 15:48 GMT

#50

Blizzard....WHY U NO USE COMMUNITY MAPS?

kawaiiryuko

United States368 Posts

July 26 2011 17:47 GMT

#51

I'm going to have Crater, Backwater and one more. It's a toss up between Typhon and Caverns, I think. I also don't like the really huge mains - it makes it so hard to get creep to connect your natural up.

Hanako

United Kingdom57 Posts

July 26 2011 18:24 GMT

#52

On July 26 2011 22:50 kodas wrote:
I'm debating on whether to veto the new maps just to avoid the numerous amount of TvT there will be since all the Zergs will veto it.

It doesn't work that.

When two players are matched up on ladder, a map is chosen from the pool left when the veto's of the two players is considered. Your veto's have no effect on your match-ups.

dezi

Germany1536 Posts

July 26 2011 18:45 GMT

#53

Even their texturejob is so awful is laughable.

WniO

United States2706 Posts

July 26 2011 19:03 GMT

#54

On July 27 2011 03:45 dezi wrote:
Even their texturejob is so awful is laughable.

yeah youre right these are so terrible

wait, no they are not. ill tell you why these maps and pretty much all of blizzards maps look good. its because you dont need to adjust your eyes to understand what is going on. everything just feels right and how it should be. with so many of our own mappers theres just too much "creativity" if you can call it that thrown in and rarely do you get a clean map that just works. for example
+ Show Spoiler +

there is just too much shit going on.

so before you just simply scoff and write off the maps looks, actually look at it. and the most impressive thing about them? they do it with so few doodads.

Mereel

Germany895 Posts

July 26 2011 19:11 GMT

#55

well i never understood why they mix 2 different stone textures....doesnt make sense at all

Archvil3

Denmark989 Posts

July 26 2011 19:16 GMT

#56

The texturework is okay. As long as you dont get the feeling that it is ugly or distracting the visuals should be the least to be concerned with. The maps got much much bigger problems then the aesthetics.

sCnDiamond

Germany340 Posts

July 26 2011 19:29 GMT

#57

On July 27 2011 03:45 dezi wrote:
Even their texturejob is so awful is laughable.

stop reading my mind, dezi ^_^! I already thought this when i first glanced at Slag Pits and Shattered Temple. Those new maps continue this. They are bad in terms of layout, but also in execution.
It can even be expressed in numbers:

Old Maps:
Metalopolis: ~900 doodads
Blistering sands: ~850 doodads
Lost Temple: ~1.000 doodads
Xel'Naga Caverns: ~600 doodads
Shakuras Plateau: ~1.250 doodads
Tal'Darim Altar: ~1.250 doodads

New maps:
Abyssal caverns: ~350 doodads
Searing Craters: ~450 doodads
Nerazim Crypts: ~500 doodads
Antiga shipyards: ~650 doodads

Sure, it's a bit like measuring apm. But if you take their quality into account, we can see that most of the doodads on the old maps are not randomly tossed onto the map, but fit it quite well and contribute to its atmosphere. On the new ones, it seems like they got mostly just spammed. Take this example:
this is what the periphery of Lost Temple looks like:

and this is what the periphery of Abyssal Caverns looks like:

lefix

Germany1082 Posts

July 26 2011 19:34 GMT

#58

i definitely agree that blizzard doesn't really put alot of time into their maps anymore, maybe they let their interns do them - i don't know. the examples wnio posted are definitely some of their better recent works.

typhon peaks has got to be the worst texturing job ever done, the texture styles don't match, they didn't bother blending them well. and you can see they moved the minerals, but didn't bother moving the texture cracks...
[image loading]

lizzard_warish

589 Posts

July 26 2011 20:00 GMT

#59

People are so god damn whiny. The maps look fine, if your actually bothered by that texture than your clearly not enjoying the game for uh, the game. They arent eye sores and its easy to tell whats going on, therefore its perfect. Screw flair. As to the balance, yeah your all possibly right, but this degree of cynicism is ridiculous given its the first day. It appears "rush distance imba!" has replaced the BW addage of "cliff imba cliff imba" [which was always proven wrong].

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

July 26 2011 20:10 GMT

#60

On July 27 2011 05:00 lizzard_warish wrote:
People are so god damn whiny. The maps look fine, if your actually bothered by that texture than your clearly not enjoying the game for uh, the game. They arent eye sores and its easy to tell whats going on, therefore its perfect. Screw flair. As to the balance, yeah your all possibly right, but this degree of cynicism is ridiculous given its the first day. It appears "rush distance imba!" has replaced the BW addage of "cliff imba cliff imba" [which was always proven wrong].

No they are not damn whiny, they are hobby mapmakers, making maps in their spare time that are better balanced and have way way better aesthetics. (edit: In fact Blizzard just fucking sucks for ignoring the incredible work that is done by these people. They don't support it with ladder, they don't promote these maps at all and they don't even have a good custom game system!!)
It's just sad that Blizzard gives us maps with this kind of aesthetical work. I can understand that they have a certain map philosophy that isn't the same we e-sport fans have (well actually I can't really understand that either but whatever), but for me the name Blizzard always stands for quality and having texture work like this is NOT a sign of quality. It's rather ridiculous, their maps should look like the best maps this mapmaking community can produce.

And I totally agree on Typhon's textures. Since I first noticed how bad it is I have never been able to unsee it :/