EPTI would love to see this used in tournaments, if for no other reason than because, visually, it is unlike any other map. Great work!
[M] (2) Crux Abyssal City LE - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
shizaep
Canada2920 Posts
I would love to see this used in tournaments, if for no other reason than because, visually, it is unlike any other map. Great work! | ||
|
ScorpSCII
Denmark499 Posts
On September 01 2012 22:11 Terranlover wrote: hell yeah, another crux map that plays exactly the same as every crux map before because it has terrible circle syndrom. its mind-boggling how this kind of maps get into gsl every fucking time. oh and im also sick of those: omg the it looks so good, it has to have good gameplay omg wow *.* (pls look at the actual map and not on the aesthetics, thx) Quoted for thruthness | ||
|
Ariuz
Germany39 Posts
| ||
|
DiMano
Korea (South)2066 Posts
On September 01 2012 22:37 Ariuz wrote: someone should really upload it to EU, i really wanna try that map! YEAH I really want to test it. | ||
|
InoyouS2
1005 Posts
EDIT: Also this map looks like it will favour the 2011 Terran strategies again, which I like. Too many macrogames makes Jack a dull boy. | ||
|
PhoenixVoid
Canada32743 Posts
 My main reservation with the map is due to how far the third is away from the main, as it can be so easily killed in ZvP quick three base situations. I do think the ramp leading to the third could be shortened more, but that's my only real problem with the map. | ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
| ||
|
Syphon8
Canada298 Posts
Each player has 4.5 clear bases, and the ground distance between bases gets larger as each expansion is taken. The 5th bases aren't very ambiguous, either. | ||
|
nokz88
Brazil1253 Posts
| ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
On September 02 2012 00:21 nokz88 wrote: Some people are complaining because you can't secure a safe sixth base? Are you fuckin' serious? Not exactly a balance concern, as a lot of maps only have 5 bases per player anyway. But the fact that there are six bases per player and you can only really take 5 unless you are already ahead is kinda frowned upon on these forums. I don't think it's as hard as people think to take those bases later in the game, though. I think when we've seen situations like that, in actual games, the bases are taken more often then you would think. It's not exactly a comfortable base, you have to fight for it, and it puts you close an opposing base so one or the other might get killed off pretty easily, but it's not actually all that bad when it comes down to it. When you force players to take those difficult bases (at least pros) they end up managing pretty well. If it comes to 6 base, though, the distance could have an effect on balance, being kinda bad for Zerg. But I think by that late in the game that doesn't apply so much, as BLs actually like short distances. Zerg doesn't really need to be ahead in bases at that point, either. | ||
|
Zamiel
United States211 Posts
| ||
|
Proseat
Germany5113 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On September 01 2012 23:35 Syphon8 wrote: Every person that's claiming this has CS and will lead to poor gameplay has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Each player has 4.5 clear bases, and the ground distance between bases gets larger as each expansion is taken. The 5th bases aren't very ambiguous, either. the 4th and 5th are definitely the problem. they are very hard to defend. 4th is very wide open and has terrain disadvantage vs attacker. 5th is basically on the enemy's back door, unless you expand cw to the super far base. On September 02 2012 02:45 Proseat wrote: That is a lot of dead space, isn't it? Almost half the map? Hope the map doesn't feel too cramped. it will probably play out like daybreak in early game, but positioning of 4th/5th, i dont know how far games will get past that point. will reserve judgement until first games i see ... | ||
|
HDgBober
25 Posts
| ||
|
Protosnake
France295 Posts
| ||
|
BraveProbe
36 Posts
| ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
a) It's another blink stalker map, no one wants to see that crap. b) The 4th really is a problem. 1 large attack route that cuts off reinforcements from the main/nat/3rd, and 2 medium sized attack routes, 1 that comes off of a highground. It would make more sense if attackers had to come UP a ramp from the lowground, since then it would be 2 good attack paths and 1 bad attack path rather than 3 good attack paths which is probably too many. I think if they fixed those 2 really-easy-to-fix issues this map would be amazing. It's already a good map, but this is the GSL, it needs to be better. On the positive side, I do love the airspace; I think we've gotten way too used to maps that have almost none, as if that's how it always should be. If there's more than a little airpsace then we cry "imbalanced". Why? What's wrong with a map that promotes a little air play? I also like the space between the nat and the 3rd; it should make for some interesting situations. | ||
|
ULuMuGuLu
190 Posts
| ||
|
nkr
Sweden5451 Posts
| ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On September 01 2012 22:11 Terranlover wrote: Honestly, what is wrong with circle syndrome? I never saw a good argument why it is bad? I only saw a long and detailed post explaining what it is and basically then spending 3 sentences on why it is bad which honestly wasn't very convincing and relied on a lot of assumptions.hell yeah, another crux map that plays exactly the same as every crux map before because it has terrible circle syndrom. its mind-boggling how this kind of maps get into gsl every fucking time. oh and im also sick of those: omg the it looks so good, it has to have good gameplay omg wow *.* (pls look at the actual map and not on the aesthetics, thx) Some of the most epic and memorable games have in my opinion happened on maps which are notorious for their circle syndrome and maps which are the antitheses of circle syndrome create pretty boring turtle fests. Circle syndrome leads to base races, circle syndrome leads to counter attacks, circle syndrome leads to forcing players to spread their army out thinly to defend all their bases. I would go so far to say that circle syndrome is a good thing that generates exciting and tense games where expansions are constantly taken and constantly denied. Circle syndrome accomplishes two things: A: It allows expansions to easily be snuck in and hard to be scouted. B: It allows expansions to be easily sniped if you are out of position. It in every way rewards map awareness and I feel circle syndrome is therefore a good thing, not a bad thing. And honestly, maps which are noted for their lack of circle syndrome, Shakuras, Metropolis, Ohana, Terminus (even though the bases are in a circle). Basically barely saw any epic games compared to Dual Sight, Antiga, TDA. a) It's another blink stalker map, no one wants to see that crap. Are you serious? I was under the impression that everyone wanted to see blink stalker harass? What do you want to see then from Protoss honestly? | ||
| ||
