I'll be writing a long post about this soon. Needed to be posted in the map forum though. This thread should talk about the pros and cons of the announcement from a map and map pool perspective.
this frustrates me... Metalopolis leaving? This was Blizzard's one of few good maps... And they didn't take out typhon or backwater, which both needed to be removed imho... Well, this is unfortunate, hopefully blizzard will hire an expert from the mapping community (i.e. groky )
well i can veto searing, typhon and probably one more. Sad to see metal go, but i guess no more lame cannon shenanigans in pvp makes it somewhat decent.
Why would they get rid of Metalopolis.... NO! That's almost like the Lost Temple for Broodwar. It's been around since beta, heck, as long as I've played SC2. Through patches and tweaks Metalopolis has stayed.
There was only one problem with Metalopolis, and that was it's close positions. And I just can't believe, I can't, that Blizzard feels that close positions are good for the game. But I have to wonder just that when instead of just making Metalopolis the "tournament standard" version, they removed this great map.
And shattered staying instead is the greatest shame. Metalopolis is a far better map, with multiple paths across the center allowing for counter attacks. It was simple for the new players, yet complex for the old. Shattered is just an open natural, with a hard to harras third.
I will miss you Metalopolis. May the games played in your glorious landscape live on in history.
I like the removed maps. TvZ was already fucking hard, and cross meta made it even worse. Typhon Peaks could have been removed too, but it isn't such a horrible map like SS or DQ so I don't mind it.
Positive: - they only removed really dumb maps (yes Meta with close position is totally dumb)
Negative: - they still totally ignore the fact that they suck at mapmaking - the maps don't look promising to me - they don't use good maps by the community, despite having NO good reason for this at all - now Xel'Naga Caverns is the only 2 spawn map, everything else is 4 spawns .... - Blizz could do something innovative with there maps since they have ladder monopol and people have to play their maps anyways.... but they don't, totally boring maps
Ladder gets more and more pathetic every time they change maps. Soon enough tournaments won't use any ladder maps anymore... then we watch matches on maps we don't play and the pros can't really ladder anymore. And it gets harder to get into the tournament scene and become a pro cause you don't know the tournament maps from laddering. Great fucking deal.
Why on earth are they removing Metalopolis!!!! Why don't they make it no close spawn. Blizzard needs to stop being arrogant and except the fact that they suck at making maps. At least they removed Scrap station, slag pits, and delta (the three maps I had veto'd). I hope the day comes that blizzard gets their head out of their bums and add in GSL maps and hire other people to make their maps. Season 3: The season of 2 base all-ins.
On July 26 2011 06:21 GiftPflanZe wrote: How am I suppose to take a third on Nerazim Crypt?its like right next to the other spawn postion,or am I missing something?looks fucking terrible.
Sad to see meta go,they just should remove close postion and it would be one of the best maps in the pool.
It's a "rush" map. You know, to keep the casual players who love to rush in the game. So to answer your question, you don't unless it's cross spawns. Or just on the opposite side of the map and hope it doesn't get spotted. And all the Zerg wept tears of sorrow.
Slag pits, Dq and SS removed great. Then you know what happens all of a sudden? Metalopolis(trumpets). Remove close pos and it would have been frickin fine.
In Season 3, we’re introducing a number of changes to the map pool; we’re dropping some older maps, and adding a number of new ones. One of the more notable changes we’re making is the removal of Metalopolis. We realize that this is quite a popular map, and we wanted to discuss the reasons why we might make such a change and hopefully lay some of your concerns to rest. We also would like to point out that merely because a map has been removed from the pool, does not mean that it will never make a return in the future. Despite its flaws, Metalopolis has strong potential to be a map that returns in future ladder seasons.
Still, there are reasons why we decided to retire Metalopolis for now:
Metalopolis has been around for quite a long time, over a year including beta. We felt that taking it out of the rotation would make some room for variety in the map pool.
Metalopolis suffers balance issues when close spawn positions occur, but becomes too predictable when they are simply disabled. Close positions have been under a lot of discussion lately, and we’re definitely examining better options to allow for random spawn positions across the map pool without also creating too much predictability and vulnerability to proxy rushes.
Overall balance has also proven to be an issue on Metalopolis -- even factoring in close position spawn issues. It’s among the least balanced maps currently in the ladder pool, and along with Scrap Station (also being removed) and Tal’darim Altar, has a heavy (60%+) bias toward zerg at the highest levels of play.
If Metalopolis makes a return to the ladder pool in the future, it will likely receive some balance tinkering, much like that administered to Lost Temple which resulted in the creation of Shattered Temple. In the meantime, we hope that you enjoy the fresh maps that have been added to the ladder pool in Season 3.
seared crater = blizzard mapmakers need a slap to the face. the map looks terrible in concerns to play... ugh and no more meta??? NO!!!! typhon and backwater could have been removed...
i still dont understand why Blizzard can't just add in some of the TL user made maps. like belshir beach or w.e. the name of the map was. seriously we have insane beautiful maps out there and we get stuck with some dissapointing maps...
As always blizzard is in the end a disappointment . First they make a great game, then they ruin it bit by bit until it ends up like world of warcraft (destroyed since the end of TBC)
Have any of you actually played the new maps? They are in custom games right now so you can try them before the update. I was skeptical of them, but in the few times I have played them, none of them felt "bad". In fact, I actually enjoyed all of them. Sure, their not GSL quality and I don't think they deserve a place outside of the ladder pool, they are not as bad as many have been saying.
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.
everybody has to stop raging about the metalopolis-removal. Blizzard are obviously just having a drunk party, and once they're sober again they'll relalise their mistake and fix it. Nothing big.
On July 26 2011 08:47 vindolol wrote: As always blizzard is in the end a disappointment . First they make a great game, then they ruin it bit by bit until it ends up like world of warcraft (destroyed since the end of TBC)
Yeah! Just like what they did with WC3 and SC BW too right?! Oh wait...
On July 26 2011 08:47 vindolol wrote: As always blizzard is in the end a disappointment . First they make a great game, then they ruin it bit by bit until it ends up like world of warcraft (destroyed since the end of TBC)
Yeah! Just like what they did with WC3 and SC BW too right?! Oh wait...
Well shall have to wait and see what the first SC2 expansion actually brings to the table.
So they removed the three maps I had vetoed (Slag, DQ, Scrap) took out metal and gave me three more new maps to veto and a tough call figuring out which one I dislike the least.
Thanks blizzey. You always know the right thing to do.
I'd like to discuss the maps. The map pool isn't that bad, in fact I don't think I'll be using all my vetos but I'll have to see.
Nerazim Crypt
This map is basically metalopolis except the close spawns aren't nearly as bad, there seems to be a bit more distance between the close spawns. The layout of the map is virtually the same as Metalopolis, cross spawns will be great and there is no close by air positions. In fact I can see long drawn out games by spawning vertically from one another.
Searing Crater
This map is one I will veto, doesn't look very good as there are multiple entrances to the natural. I can't really see anyone liking this map. But actually, it could be a great map for zerg because it offers plenty of counter attack options, but I'm a zerg and will probably veto this.
Antiga Shipyard
This map reminds me of blizzards Terminus, same texture scheme except its a lot better. There does look to be some abusive things siege tanks can do to your 3rd from the main next to it but at that point you will have ways to deal with siege tanks. I think more likely, 2 base siege tank pushes might involve using the 3rd bases high ground to set up tanks which could be abusive. Looks like a nice macro map and cross spawns will bring about long games.
Abyssal Caverns
If I thought the 1st map was metalopolis, this one is even more so. It has close air spawns but spawning horizontally from one another doesn't look nearly as bad as meta's close spawns do. All of the open space around the map looks like a good map for mutas and drop play. I think this is one of the better maps as there are no real abusive areas for terrans or protoss to take advantage of however there are a lot of chokes making this map probably the most balanced.
As for removing metalopolis I can't see why people are angry. The only spawn positioning that was optimal was cross spawns. Close spawns were terrible and close air spawns didn't have that much more distance to travel. Tournaments will still be using metalopolis with close spawns disabled, it's gone from ladder but it will still be played so give it a rest and stop raging I think it's a good thing we see it removed.
Im really looking forward to http://www.notblizzladder.com/ comming to europe, and getting big in the whole - beeing able to chose maps myself BW style would be a huge benefit for training. Of couse if you focus on getting high on ladder, which eventually will come for me aswell, theres just not so much you can do, allthough - posting abot it, making blizzard aware of it is important But for the sake of becomming better ill still stick with UMS maps.
and nvs: yes, let us hope for the best with the expansion.
Certainly nobody misses Slag Pits and Delta, and Scrap Station was getting old. The Metal removal is going to be a huge point of contention, as we can already see. On one hand, its removal does solve one of the worst problems Blizzard has with their pool. But if they had opted for the MLG version, then it becomes a great map that everyone likes. Outright removing it does solve the close spawn problem of course, but it also means one less map I can automatically include in my map selection.
Abyssal Caverns: Automatic downvote. The map has no logical 3rd. I don't see any Zerg players even trying to play this, and I wouldn't blame them.
Searing Crater: Confusing. Blizzard for some reason claims the natural is "easily protected," yet it has multiple entrances, a wall that tanks will love to sit behind, and the map is small enough to allow (if not outright encourage) early attacks that deny expanding. A baneling bust can reach any natural expo before the 6:00 mark, for instance. I don't like maps where the distance between naturals is that small. Downvote.
Nerazim Crypt: The new version removes the blockaded gold expos, turning them into more standard 3rd bases. This map seems excellent in a far-position spawn game. And the closer spawn positions aren't nearly as bad as Metal or Temple. Way better than Abyssal and Searing.
Antiga Shipyard: Good map.
So, the Season 3 downvotes are looking to be Backwater, Abyssal Caverns and Searing Crater.
On July 26 2011 15:01 Sushbag wrote: Abyssal Caverns: Automatic downvote. The map has no logical 3rd. I don't see any Zerg players even trying to play this, and I wouldn't blame them.
Remember when we were all shitting on Shakurahs, and then it turned out that vertical spawn was impossible? Try assuming that for Abyssal. Now you get possibly the most easy to hold gold of all maps, that even is almost always your best third.
On July 26 2011 05:52 Pandain wrote: Why would they get rid of Metalopolis.... NO! That's almost like the Lost Temple for Broodwar. It's been around since beta, heck, as long as I've played SC2. Through patches and tweaks Metalopolis has stayed.
There was only one problem with Metalopolis, and that was it's close positions. And I just can't believe, I can't, that Blizzard feels that close positions are good for the game. But I have to wonder just that when instead of just making Metalopolis the "tournament standard" version, they removed this great map.
And shattered staying instead is the greatest shame. Metalopolis is a far better map, with multiple paths across the center allowing for counter attacks. It was simple for the new players, yet complex for the old. Shattered is just an open natural, with a hard to harras third.
I will miss you Metalopolis. May the games played in your glorious landscape live on in history.
People saw how powerful Terran was in close positions and completely overlooked how powerful Zerg was in cross positions. Zerg won way over 50% of cross position games because taking expansions was way too easy on that map. Blizzard had the stats for all of the maps right there and saw that 2/3 spawns were imba for one race or another.
I'll miss the simplicity of the map and not having to worry about rocks, but the truth is that the map wasn't working as well as they want their maps to.
This is going to be PvZ hell. Every game Protoss will open FFE and zerg will go for quick three base. Zerg can easily connect their three bases together with creep. 11 and 2 can block the choke with x2 3x3 buildings and a pylon, 5 and 7 need x3 3x3 buildings. The biggest thing that breaks the matchup, though, is the massive wide open spaces. Seriously, this map is more open than taldarim.
Searing Crator
wtf is this map. It looks like one of those maps original blizzard maps in SC1. Terrans will love this map imo, as a Protoss I have no idea how to play this map in any of the matchups. I want it to die.
Antiga Shipyard
Hands down the best map in the pool. Should be dominated by FE play into quick thirds. The option of the gold is nice as well. I can't spot any immediate imbalances either! Should be fun to play.
Abyssal Caverns
Bit of a meh map. Has some obvious positional imbalance but at least the map will be playable (read: 2base timing push every game). This picture is probably quite accurate + Show Spoiler +
I am really sad to see metal go as others said. Everytime I got that map I felt comfortable playing it and enjoyed many of my games on there. I Like the idea of new maps and the fact that they don't have as many 2 spawn maps. 2 spawn maps often shout cheese. I think 50% of the time I get Xel'naga I get cheesed. Most of the time I beat it, but i ladder to have some fun long macro games not cheesy 2gate, scv all-in, or 7 pooled.
To each map a little Statement: Nerazim Crypt (4): Protoss makes a Forge Expand and then fuck the 3rd of Zerg -> GG Searing Crater (4) I think a pretty good map u must take down the rocks at ur natural then its ok against Terra. Good 4rd Thumps up. But 1 Base Tank Pushes are not holdable Antiga Shipyard (4) The best Map good to expand -> good for Macro -> good for the game Abyssal Caverns (4) Same think like at Nerazim Crypt -> unwinable for Zerg
So I have 2 new Maps to veto and Backwater Gulch and Typhon Peeks so I have to play 1 terrible map *Thumps Up Blizzard*
All my previous map vetos were removed (thx blizzard!), so I'll only have to play on 1 of the 4 new maps. Thinking I won't veto Abyssal Caverns or Antiga Shipyard.
Nerazim Crypt is no third base Searing Crater is 1 second nat-nat walk time Antiga Shipyard is get gg'd by tanks at the main... Abyssal Caverns looks to be the only *decent* map
Good to see metalopolis gone though, close positions on that map was hell... still a good Zerg map though >-<
Will veto 2 of the new maps (judging from looking at pictures) and Backwater gulch.
Too bad they removed metalopolis, it's the most played map and I rarely hear anything bad about it (except close pos). But would prefer if they changed it up a bit and removed close position
On July 26 2011 16:47 Plexa wrote: Antiga Shipyard
Hands down the best map in the pool. Should be dominated by FE play into quick thirds. The option of the gold is nice as well. I can't spot any immediate imbalances either! Should be fun to play.
I agree that the layout looks nice for Blizzard standards but I think the way the mirrored middle is used in a rotational map here is questionable. One thing I thought of: I imagine TvT close spawns and player X spawns at 8. Player X imo has a big advantage cause his blocked third ramp directly points at the gold giving him a great fourth, while the other player does not have this option.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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:
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...
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].
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 :/
typhoons brick/tile textures dont work as well as the other tilesets with that same combo but the rest of that map looks pretty solid.
and the reason why they are lowering the doodad count is because its rediculous on lower end pcs, which they should have done in the first place. xel naga in the middle is very taxing.
gameplay wise i think the new maps are fine. that space one reminds me of colosseum i think?
On July 27 2011 07:04 Cloud9157 wrote: Only played on Abyssal Caverns, but I think its safe to say that Protoss should down vote that map. Close by air PvT is a damn joke.
Watching Tyler's stream the only map-specific strat I can see causing protoss headaches is marine tank. once set up, it becomes near impossible to break out because of the narrow choke, not to mention the ramp is completely exposed.
It is a VERY good map for PvZ though. So ridiculously easy to forcefield the ramp. Not to mention you are almost always attacking with a superior concave.
The new maps are awful. I wish I had enough downvotes for all of them. It's nearly impossible to take a 3rd base in many close positions, and they're pretty close positions.
Even though Scrap, DQ, and Slag were removed, the entire map pool got worse.
On July 27 2011 08:37 RAGEMOAR The Pope wrote: The new maps are awful. I wish I had enough downvotes for all of them. It's nearly impossible to take a 3rd base in many close positions, and they're pretty close positions.
Even though Scrap, DQ, and Slag were removed, the entire map pool got worse.
Excluding Searing Crater, the shortest position between bases is close spawns on nerazim crypts and even that is a little further than the distance between Metalopolis close air positions. On the other two maps the close positions are the same as close positions on both Terminus SE, and Tal'Darim Altar.
On July 27 2011 08:42 iGrok wrote: Whiplash has discovered that Abyssal Cavern's is not symmetric, even cross-spawns. Seriously, how fucking difficult is that to do?
Specifically relating to offensive cannon placement, certain bases are much easier to cannon than others.
even metalopolis had variations of symmetry so its nothing new and makes things more interesting imo. and i think, but i could be wrong they always do the shift symmetrical thing.
On July 27 2011 08:42 iGrok wrote: Whiplash has discovered that Abyssal Cavern's is not symmetric, even cross-spawns. Seriously, how fucking difficult is that to do?
Specifically relating to offensive cannon placement, certain bases are much easier to cannon than others.
they should remove searing crater soon, cause it will be one of the most imbalanced maps in history... i just dont understand why they dont put at least one gsl map in the ladderpool instead of experimenting with dump maps like searing crater, where you can see so much imbalanced stuff if you watch on the picture of the map for just 3 min.
and also: just remove close spawn on metalopolis.. its not predictable at all !!
On July 27 2011 08:42 iGrok wrote: Whiplash has discovered that Abyssal Cavern's is not symmetric, even cross-spawns. Seriously, how fucking difficult is that to do?
Specifically relating to offensive cannon placement, certain bases are much easier to cannon than others.
I think the belief that all maps need to be 100% symmetric is bad. Yeah, it means that something can work on this base but not that base. But is it bad that players actually have to consider the map when they play?
Maps shouldn't be made with the idea of complete and total balance. Such a thing isn't ever possible to obtain. Hell, even Metalopolis was biased towards Zerg, giving them a 60%+ win ratio on it, despite the fact that we all thought differently. If a player spawns in base X, he says to himself "this is the cannon rushing base!" and if he has a Protoss opponent, he place his buildings, and prepares his early game, a little more safely.
On July 27 2011 08:42 iGrok wrote: Whiplash has discovered that Abyssal Cavern's is not symmetric, even cross-spawns. Seriously, how fucking difficult is that to do?
Specifically relating to offensive cannon placement, certain bases are much easier to cannon than others.
Maps shouldn't be made with the idea of complete and total balance.
Love how many people get really emotional about the maps, especially when 95% of them lose because of macro mechanics and unit selection rather than map unfairness. I've never used a veto.
On July 27 2011 14:13 bobwhiz wrote: Love how many people get really emotional about the maps, especially when 95% of them lose because of macro mechanics and unit selection rather than map unfairness. I've never used a veto.
If you're going to talk shit like that, take it to the other thread. This is from a map standpoint, not a play standpoint.
On July 27 2011 08:42 iGrok wrote: Whiplash has discovered that Abyssal Cavern's is not symmetric, even cross-spawns. Seriously, how fucking difficult is that to do?
Specifically relating to offensive cannon placement, certain bases are much easier to cannon than others.
Maps shouldn't be made with the idea of complete and total balance.
stopped reading here.
Then your post, and you, serve no purpose in this thread. Disparity forces ingenuity.
Already don't like searing because of the design of the natural, so I'll keep it veto'd. Still, it's refreshing to have new maps and I look forward to playing through them.
I don't know if there's a way to figure out from the files, but do any of the new maps prevent any particular spawn locations like Shakuras did? Some of the maps seem like they would have some tough close positions.
On July 27 2011 16:40 arew wrote: Anyone knows when people will be seeded into GM league? Within 2 weeks of new season start or?
Its 2 weeks, yes.
On July 27 2011 15:30 Emporio wrote: I don't know if there's a way to figure out from the files, but do any of the new maps prevent any particular spawn locations like Shakuras did? Some of the maps seem like they would have some tough close positions.
I don't think there is any prevention regarding the spawn locations unfortunately...
Nerazim Crypt The ramp is too far away. The destructible rocks in the natural are useless, it's not a bad idea but the choke is too big it makes no difference with or without the rocks. The middle is probably too open, you can't get out of your base against zerg (assuming you didn't exploit the short rush distances to cheese them to death early on).
Searing Crater I kinda like the reaper stairway at the back of the main and the DR at the 3rd, but that ridge in the natural is just ugly and plain stupid.
Antiga Shipyard Seems ok
Abyssal Caverns I like the colors used, not the lack of doodads. Does Blizzard have a time limit to make each map, like 15 minutes per map ? Still it looks like a good map for the general idea, I kinda like it, except for that : cheapest way to secure 5 bases ever XD
After playing each of them for a bit, I have come to dislike most of the new maps. On Abyssal Caverns, I have yet to play anything but a PvZ, but it always gets into strange situations. Nezarim Crypt. It's, okay, but not great. I may like it, but for now, not really. Antiga Shipyard: I actually haven't played a straight up macro game here, but it is a fun map. This is the one that I cant really complain about. Searing Crater: I hate this map. The natural is retarded and the giant wall preventing movement along with 3 potential openings to the nat makes it rather hard to FE at all, but I guess not all maps are designed for that. Also, the distance between ramps of vertical position naturals is literally a gold base.
they might have poor aesthetics, but if players adept to them and accept them and blizzards balances the game around them, then we as mapmakers will have alot more possibilities soon
On July 27 2011 23:52 lefix wrote: they might have poor aesthetics, but if players adept to them and accept them and blizzards balances the game around them, then we as mapmakers will have alot more possibilities soon
I don't get that post. So you think we'll be allowed to make shitty imba maps in the future, too? Or did i just not get the irony?
Thank god (or Blizzard) that these evil Scrap Station and Slag Pits maps are finally history! But Metalopolis?! C'mon, this was a very enjoyable and balanced map!
Don't know if I will like or hate Nerazim Crypt as I just got steamrolled by a Marauder Rush from a Diamond player having his Season 3 placement match against me poor Silver leaguer... :-(
So I experimented with a wall off at natural for PvZ on the new maps.
I've concluded so far that you can FFE on upper left and bottom right spawn of Antiga Shipyard, you can do a wall off similar to Tal'Darim Altar on Nerazim Crypt(you don't even have to kill anything either, just destroy the rocks when you want to leave).
Finally, theres Abyssal Caverns. You can also doa full wall off like Tal'Darim with forge, cyber, and gateway.
Searing may have something to it, but the second opening at your natural is just screwing it all up.
On July 27 2011 22:42 fenX wrote: Nerazim Crypt The ramp is too far away. The destructible rocks in the natural are useless, it's not a bad idea but the choke is too big it makes no difference with or without the rocks. The middle is probably too open, you can't get out of your base against zerg (assuming you didn't exploit the short rush distances to cheese them to death early on).
Searing Crater I kinda like the reaper stairway at the back of the main and the DR at the 3rd, but that ridge in the natural is just ugly and plain stupid.
Antiga Shipyard Seems ok
Abyssal Caverns I like the colors used, not the lack of doodads. Does Blizzard have a time limit to make each map, like 15 minutes per map ? Still it looks like a good map for the general idea, I kinda like it, except for that : cheapest way to secure 5 bases ever XD
That's not the only path. But in a 5 base situation, I'm assuming 2rax and 2 tanks would go down in under 3.5 seconds.
That was (half) a joke. That area just seems weird, the choke is too small for a center attack path in the middle of the map, that "2 separated sides" watchtower favors ranged units over melee units, and I think it favors heavily terrans in TvZ. Usually zergs can control XNT more often than terran and see big pushes coming, here terran will take vision on the center more easily, forcing zerg to avoid that area and run on much longer distances, with kinda negate the zerg advantage of faster units. I'll wait and see how it plays, did't test it yet, I had only 2 games on Nerazim on ladder and none on the other maps.
On July 28 2011 10:09 fenX wrote: That was (half) a joke. That area just seems weird, the choke is too small for a center attack path in the middle of the map, that "2 separated sides" watchtower favors ranged units over melee units, and I think it favors heavily terrans in TvZ. Usually zergs can control XNT more often than terran and see big pushes coming, here terran will take vision on the center more easily, forcing zerg to avoid that area and run on much longer distances, with kinda negate the zerg advantage of faster units. I'll wait and see how it plays, did't test it yet, I had only 2 games on Nerazim on ladder and none on the other maps.
Just to help you with the mental side of the battle:
Terran doesn't have infinite units. Terran doesn't have infinite money.
If he holes up in the center, you can win by simply going around. Truth is, I can't imagine any Terran player deciding to leave his tanks sieged so far away from a base. Even leaving an early game marine there would make Terran feel very insecure.
On July 28 2011 10:09 fenX wrote: That was (half) a joke. That area just seems weird, the choke is too small for a center attack path in the middle of the map, that "2 separated sides" watchtower favors ranged units over melee units, and I think it favors heavily terrans in TvZ. Usually zergs can control XNT more often than terran and see big pushes coming, here terran will take vision on the center more easily, forcing zerg to avoid that area and run on much longer distances, with kinda negate the zerg advantage of faster units. I'll wait and see how it plays, did't test it yet, I had only 2 games on Nerazim on ladder and none on the other maps.
Mutas can kill those tanks without marines touching them.
I don't get why everyone's so upset with Metalopolis beeing taken out. That map was in the pool for a whole year now, That's just waaaaay too long. Even good maps have to go sometime.
This comment would be even more justified if Blizz actually replaced it with some decent maps instead of that pile of bs they dropped on us.
On July 28 2011 12:46 FlopTurnReaver wrote: I don't get why everyone's so upset with Metalopolis beeing taken out. That map was in the pool for a whole year now, That's just waaaaay too long. Even good maps have to go sometime.
This comment would be even more justified if Blizz actually replaced it with some decent maps instead of that pile of bs they dropped on us.
I guess it's because there aren't new good maps coming in order to replace them. But i agree with you, one year is more than enough. I would also say that it's time to get XNC to retire.
On July 27 2011 23:52 lefix wrote: they might have poor aesthetics, but if players adept to them and accept them and blizzards balances the game around them, then we as mapmakers will have alot more possibilities soon
I don't get that post. So you think we'll be allowed to make shitty imba maps in the future, too? Or did i just not get the irony?
Currently we have some unwritten rules like "nat2nat distance must be at least this long" or "natural must be able to be walled of a certain way". These do restrict us in our map making process. But blizzard seems not to care much about what is currently considered a good map. And they can. And players will accept it and adapt to it anyway because they have to. Also blizzard has the possibility to balance the game around new map features. And eventually this could lead to opening new possibilities to us mapmakers.
I personally prefer these images, OP (please edit the OP?), pulled from Liquipedia (much larger and easier to see details): [and I'll provide my Zerg v X opinions] Abyssal_Caverns + Show Spoiler +
My thoughts: Horizontal and veritcal symmetry (slightly angular)
xelnaga tower wars will be interesting if non-ranged units, making melee (e.g. zerglings) less-viable tower controllers.
Horizontal close spawns are interesting, makes the rocks necessary to break down for big pushes, in order to avoid the smaller chokes everywhere, yet the golds become more accessible as a reasonable 3rd, given you prepare in time for taking down the rocks. Map will tend to split vertically down the center, and the water patches provide a nice natural barrier for broodlords to mass and hold.
Vertical close spawns encourage the middle top/bottom blue expos as a 3rd, and possibly spliting the map top versus bottom, though the top or bottom waters are probably the best location for broodlords to mass, and end-game engagements around the golds are more probable.
Cross spawns, usually favoring Zerg on most maps, are still difficult due to the imposed vertical split, making gold vs blue as a 3rd a difficult decision, though shifting the end-game similar to the horizontal close spawns may be preferable, so I'd likely attempt to expand to the gold as a 3rd instead, with the other main/nat as 4th...
My thoughts: Rotational symmetry, (watch the main's cliff for cliff walk rushes ala reaper, but at least there's just the one point of entry to worry about)
Opponent is close-spawn clockwise: 3rd is best to take your natural blue, though farther gold may be an option if you can hold the center. Wide open center makes it nice for zerg, though be careful not to give up the high-ground in the middle, yet most fighting will likely be on the low ground. End-game mapsplitting will likely draw a vertical or cross-diagonal line down the map, though I think the cross diagonal might encourage your main techstructures to avoid being in your main...
Opponent is close-spawn counter-clockwise: 3rd is a tough call, due to close air with your natural 3rd. Perhaps a hidden clockwise 3rd or gold can work, but if you take your third, be ready to respond to air/drops. Big engagements will still likely be in the center low-ground, unless air is the route the game takes, but holding the center is still vital if the map splits. End-game mapsplitting will likely draw a horizontal or cross-diagonal line down the map. If cross-diagonal, this may be an advantage if your tech is safely tucked away in your main, further from the fight.
Cross-spawns: Taking your natural 3rd blue seems the safest, but watch your 3rd's back rocks. Control of the center becomes much more vital, for if the opponent gets the high ground, they'll virtually control the 3 other corners of the map. End-game map splitting could likely go any way.
My thoughts: Rotational symmetry, (cliff walking viable along any lower edge of main)
Like the analysis for Antiga Shipyards, I think the thirds are similar with the exception of Opponent spawns counter-clockwise: The low ground natural 3rd (with ramp angled towards your main) is a high-risk. Not only is it close air, but it's low ground, making it that much harder to hold. I don't like it, but taking your clockwise 3rd is probably the only viable option, other than trying to sneak a hidden 3rd in another main/nat. Wide open middle is interesting, though 4 high-ground towers are a threat to any middle of the map engagements, so tread with caution. I'm not the veto-ing type, I generally play on all maps and adamantly refuse to veto, though if I had to veto one, it would probably be this one, though I think the open middle can be useful, though 4 towers on high ground can be difficult to hold.
My thoughts: Horizontal and veritcal symmetry This map seems similar to Abyssal Caverns.
Horizontal close spawns encourage gold for a 3rd, though the rocks at your blue 3rd can provide some security, yet the non-ramped cliff is scary, especially vs terran drops on the cliff. Speaking of, offensively, this is a great place to make broodlords safely, or maybe even dropping hydras, similar to Lost Temple, but at least the cliffs aren't at our naturals, an improvement in my opinion. End-game map splitting will likely be a vertical line down the center, and the vertical natural makes for a reasonably defendable 4th.
Vertical close spawns, 3rd blue seems more reasonable, but you better guard your cliff, though at least you'll have time to make it to lair tech by then... End-game map splitting encourages a horizontal line across the middle, and opposite gold might make an interested hidden expo, provided time to take down the rocks, and be careful to spot the opponent thinking the same thing.
For Cross spawns, I say just take the gold, its got rocks you have to tear down, but minus those pesky cliffs.
I'm disappointed to find out when I went to start playing 1s again today that Meta is out of the map pool. The only real reason for that is that close pos. are retarded. Apart from that I think it is one of the most balanced maps out and I felt should have stayed as a main map through many seasons, especially since it is still popular in many tournaments. The idea that they have kept Shattered Temple still with close positions is ridiculous too since they got rid of Meta. Both maps are OK and great for players to learn and practice on so I don't see the reasoning why one goes and the other stays.
Only having one 2 spawn map is kind of disturbing to me too. I guess it's going to be a lot of fun scouting those zergs with their 6pools last. Again that isn't going to help them get more people to play 1v1 as new people are generally pretty bad at scouting and it helps if you at least know where your opponent is to begin with. Also for more experienced players I think it opens up a lot more strategies, like proxies for example.
On August 01 2011 07:39 lefix wrote: blizzards official reason for taking out meta wasn't the close position problem, but that it was too predictable in how it plays out.
More like it's too predictable about how there aren't any destructible rocks. What a load of rubbish from Blizz. Thanks for letting me know though.
EPT
)
![[image loading]](http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/3201/ggzerg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wLfxH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jp8Jo.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/d3bbW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/m2m1d.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2g7Wq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PbmtV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xdw2X.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FxhPE.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PX9lV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QcoCs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rYHR1.jpg)
v X opinions]![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/6/67/Abyssal_Caverns.jpg/692px-Abyssal_Caverns.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/c/c0/Antiga_Shipyard.jpg/582px-Antiga_Shipyard.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/2/28/Nerazim_Crypt.jpg/600px-Nerazim_Crypt.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/3/32/Searing_Crater.jpg/600px-Searing_Crater.jpg)
