| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
EDIT: Here is a TvZ replay which clearly shows the abuse from certain spawn locations. At these locations it is especially hard for the zerg to stop the attack. http://www.mediafire.com/?y6d2h95m5g0uwok Here is a replay http://www.mediafire.com/?aqcq1nc1r4qt2n9 EDIT: I have added a screen shot so you can see in case you don't want to look at replay ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/4jO5K.jpg) | ||
|
NoisyNinja
United States991 Posts
1. Expand by 10 minutes 2. Turrets on mineral line by 10 minutes 3. Make sure to be creative. | ||
|
GameTime
United States222 Posts
| ||
|
NoisyNinja
United States991 Posts
| ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
Also I do not see how having a missile turret would be that good.. he could easily kill off a missile turret from his position. | ||
|
djdoodoo
United Kingdom192 Posts
| ||
|
freetgy
1720 Posts
| ||
|
Lmui
Canada6219 Posts
@NoisyNinja: Turrets by the mineral line are only if they have banshees and in general you only get one, in the middle of the mineral line area which wouldn't help anyways against this kind of push. And in general, although the natural should be able to be shelled from low ground, the main CC shouldn't be targetable from any point other than within the base itself. | ||
|
NoisyNinja
United States991 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:12 Lmui wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong but one or two siege tanks look like they can siege and hit the CC from the gold base area. @NoisyNinja: Turrets by the mineral line are only if they have banshees and in general you only get one, in the middle of the mineral line area which wouldn't help anyways against this kind of push. And in general, although the natural should be able to be shelled from low ground, the main CC shouldn't be targetable from any point other than within the base itself. The turrets could just deny vision (by shooting the vikings) or just stall long enough for your tanks to get into position. They would stall by providing a target for the opponent's tanks. I put 2-3 turrets on the mineral line to defend against drops and air harassment. I agree with your second point though. | ||
|
ziggy408
United States72 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:01 NoisyNinja wrote: I wouldn't go to say "IMBA NERF OR FIX PLZ", but it is an awkward positioning. The only reason he can do that is because he has vikings for sight. I see that it is around 9 minutes into the game, and as far as I can tell, you don't have an Engineering bay. My general rule of thumb for Terran is: 1. Expand by 10 minutes 2. Turrets on mineral line by 10 minutes 3. Make sure to be creative. but then the vikings give sight of the turret and the tanks just shoot that first? | ||
|
ionlyplayPROtoss
Canada573 Posts
| ||
|
mistokibbles
United States68 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:01 NoisyNinja wrote: 2. Turrets on mineral line by 10 minutes You always invest in random turrets even if you don't scout any kind of air units coming? | ||
|
inpacktt
Macedonia20 Posts
| ||
|
diegonolan
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
djdoodoo
United Kingdom192 Posts
| ||
|
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
| ||
|
kasumimi
Greece460 Posts
This seems like interesting, creative and fun strategy unfolding on one of the cool and well-made blizzard maps. On a serious note, this issue was present in Steppes of war also. You shouldn't have much issues if you see it coming and place your own tanks there, or stop the push before he gets underneath your main cliff. Also, as a T user you can abuse this yourself -_- | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
Lots of naturals can be hit by tanks from the outside, but usually, the main is supposed to be safe. This is going to become the next lost temple thor drop. | ||
|
Zerokaiser
Canada885 Posts
| ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
| ||
|
GreenFaction
United States82 Posts
Slag does feel a little small to me, though. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On all those maps...you need a turret ring+1-2 of your own tanks there to stop incursions. | ||
|
AimForTheBushes
United States1760 Posts
edit: I'm going to have to make a video now announcing my newfound arch-rivalry with Avilo for beating me to that response by mere seconds...damn my horrible micro..  | ||
|
aquanda
United States477 Posts
| ||
|
Santi
Colombia466 Posts
| ||
|
statikg
Canada930 Posts
To the people saying missile turrets.....who puts missile turrets everywhere randomly. The only way to stop this would be if you had air control. | ||
|
Bygone
United States58 Posts
| ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:27 mistokibbles wrote: You always invest in random turrets even if you don't scout any kind of air units coming? well air control is super important in XvT, so yeah it's not a bad idea to blindly do something like that, but if anything I'd rather blindly make a ton of vikings just to secure air control and stop shit like this. A raven+viking opening would crush this and it's never a bad idea to open with air in TvT As someone said, it's stupid to make turrets to stop this kind of harass because vikings and tanks can slowly move up destroying 1 turret at a time until the coast is clear. | ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
On March 05 2011 11:04 GreenFaction wrote: A tank position like that is a juicy pick off for mutalisks, so I think it may be premature to say that it is imbalanced just because it reaches. Also, with the tanks right up against the wall like that, roaches could pick them off too. Both of these counter strats might work because the marines can't necessarily get into a good defensive position. AKA: it's risky to expose your tanks so much (assuming you can get them there without sacrificing too much to begin with). Slag does feel a little small to me, though. lol, when was the last time you got mutas out in time to stop an early tank push? this would be pretty devastating for quite awhile and since there is no easy 3rd, you would be stuck on 3 gases which is terrible support for mutas. | ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
On March 05 2011 11:44 Bygone wrote: dear terran player, now you know how zerg felt when u used to drop their cliff on lost temple. deal with it dear whatever race you are, you're going to have to deal with this just as much as anyone this isn't TvT specific, it's the horrible map. | ||
|
ThE_OsToJiY
Canada1167 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:34 djdoodoo wrote: The map has only just been released. Issues like this were clearly going to come up and I'm sure they'll be changed eventually. because being able to siege mineral lines from other areas is a totally new and unexpected. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
The real question though, was asked by Merz, can you do this at all bases? Also, putting your tanks in siege range of someone's mineral line in their main is ridiculous, good luck to zerg and protoss at holding this one off. | ||
|
statikg
Canada930 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On March 05 2011 11:15 avilo wrote: Lots of map have this "sweet spot" that tanks can get under to leverage dropships into the main. Off the top of my head...lost temple, metalopolis, slag pits, shakuras, desert oasis, delta quadrant...etc. It's just something you have to be aware of because if you can take that location you get a huge advantage and become cost effective, same if your opponent uses it. On all those maps...you need a turret ring+1-2 of your own tanks there to stop incursions. except in every other example your sieging from the natural to the main, theres a ramp to run down and hit the tank and supporting units. on this map look at the distance between the ramp and where the tank is On March 05 2011 11:26 aquanda wrote: I thought it was pretty comical that Blizzard compared this map to Metalopolis. If anything, this is the retarded inbred step brother of Meta. this is what happens with meta has babies with steppes | ||
|
Baeras
United States140 Posts
| ||
|
29 fps
United States5725 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:27 mistokibbles wrote: You always invest in random turrets even if you don't scout any kind of air units coming? i would. who knows when they'll drop or come with banshees? just 1-2, not a whole lot. | ||
|
theorybiscuit
Canada117 Posts
| ||
|
aeoliant
Canada361 Posts
| ||
|
naggerNZ
New Zealand708 Posts
| ||
|
Armsved
Denmark642 Posts
| ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 05 2011 12:19 naggerNZ wrote: Since you'll have vision of that spot when defending, just pull your SCVs out of range while he's sieging up, then take em out while he's firing shots at your CC. If your reaction times are bad, though, it could be pretty devastating. Except that it prevents a lot of mining during the attack, a critical fact that makes producing to defeat any form of tank all-in or even push much harder than it should be. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
On March 05 2011 12:19 Armsved wrote: You can kinda do that on a lot of maps... No, there is no other map where you can do this. Some people have used meta as an example however meta is not like slag pits. on meta you can siege the mineral line from right next to the ramp entering the base, which is at the natural expansion. On slag the point that you can siege from is no where near the natural expansion or the ramp. Also I am not saying that it is imbalanced in a TvT. I am saying the map is inbalanced in that you simply should not be able to siege someones main from a remote area. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45167 Posts
And is "Slag Pits" the ugliest map name ever or what? | ||
|
bronzeterran
United States296 Posts
| ||
|
rwrzr
United States1980 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:05 eVolvE342 wrote: I am not saying that my particular game is the reason it should be fixed... I am saying the fact that you can siege someones main from the side of their base while not being in their base should not be possible. Also I do not see how having a missile turret would be that good.. he could easily kill off a missile turret from his position. Isn't the point of sieging to be outside and shoot in/at? | ||
|
Nemireck
Canada1875 Posts
This is not an imbalance. It's just really poor map design. | ||
|
Logarythm
United States264 Posts
| ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On March 05 2011 12:54 Nemireck wrote: People really need to learn what the definition of an "imbalance" is. This is not an imbalance. It's just really poor map design. Educate us, it seems pretty imbalanced to me (at least in non-mirrors). If a terran can siege in an offensive position AND has a defensive advantage there, tanks are so retardedly powerful that it constitutes an imbalance. | ||
|
The_Piper42
United States426 Posts
| ||
|
Immolate
42 Posts
| ||
|
oOOoOphidian
United States1402 Posts
| ||
|
caracarn
Sweden141 Posts
You should try play zerg on that map... | ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
| ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 05 2011 13:28 oOOoOphidian wrote: Not sure I think this is an imbalance of the map. If anything it's an interesting way for Terran to contain other Terran or Protoss players that IMO seems pretty difficult to pull off (compared to just dropping a Tank on a ledge). Horrible map, but I don't think "fixing" this would really make any difference. Actually it's very easy to pull off. Get a few tanks, some marines, a viking or two, and save a scan. Push to that spot with a strong one base attack, protoss will try to hold the ramp. Siege up in that spot, ramp is a far distance away so toss units cannot hit your tank for a while. Stalkers can attack but tanks will fry them. Repair with scvs and put up a couple bunkers to stop zealots from running at your tanks. Scan once on the high ground to clear out ranged units so your viking doesn't get picked off, then use the viking to grant vision. You are now attacking their workers, and they can't mine anymore. Thus, they can't make more units. You have now won. Same for zerg, except you need to get the bunkers up quickly to keep lings off your tanks while you get entrenched, and you'll probably want a banshee instead of a viking. Roaches can hit your tanks, but they won't have anywhere near enough and you can repair them. For hilarity, hit their natural's mineral line with some hellions at the same time to completely deny any mining at either base. | ||
|
ChineseWife
United States373 Posts
| ||
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
| ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
On March 05 2011 14:04 onbaton wrote: its TvT... IMBAAAAAAAAAAAA if you would read the post you would know its not a TvT imba cry. Of course TvT isnt imba. thats not what this thread is trying to say. It is saying the map position is imbalanced regardless of what race the opponent is. Please read the thread before making needless remarks | ||
|
DrQton
United States17 Posts
| ||
|
Arkless
Canada1547 Posts
| ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
Silly terrans! You have more than just siege tanks! | ||
|
BoxedLunch
United States387 Posts
| ||
|
elsx
115 Posts
| ||
|
Flyingpants
79 Posts
On March 05 2011 14:12 Reborn8u wrote: It's broken. I can only imagine how horrible this would be to deal with in tvp or tvz. Especially if they build bunkers to defend the tanks. You should NEVER be able to seige a main or the main mineral line from out side the base. They took out jungle basin because you could siege the expo and the main ramp. This is much worse. Sieging bases in general from behind cliffs is retarded. Lets terren do ridiculous elevator play. Mutas cannot pick a tank off, you will lose 5 muta to marines for 1 tank. | ||
|
GeNeSiDe
United Kingdom354 Posts
Sure the close spot is very close but thats a luck of the draw that everyone has to deal with. People complain because you can't go hatchfirst in TvZ: my reply to that is that your not meant to go blind hatchfirst every game, i like zergs like you because i always scout close pos. first so if i discover a z goin hatchfirst block expo and 2rax pressure works a charm...learn dynamic play not cookie-cutter builds! | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
 . Only time will tell I guess, not a problem so far. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
| ||
|
JDub
United States976 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:55 Zerokaiser wrote: Implying that anything about Slag Pits IS balanced. It's small, has close spawns, no 3rd... Yeah, if we're going to talk about imbalance on Slag Pits let's talk about how close positions are closer than Steppes of War spawns. | ||
|
SheaR619
United States2399 Posts
| ||
|
hi im new
Germany150 Posts
i instavetoed the map anyway i haven't even played it once. probably the worst map ever. | ||
|
SnowSC2
United States678 Posts
I cannot comprehend how after all the complaining about small maps, they release a map with a record-setting short rush distance, and now this. Idk how badly it will affect tvx games but we'll have to see how it plays out, i think this might be the new steppes if blizz becomes as reluctant to remove it as it was. | ||
|
Touch
Canada475 Posts
Yeah, Slag Pits and Typhon Peaks suck. You needn't even mention imbalances considering the back doors to each spawn's natural, it's pretty obvious. | ||
|
Deja Thoris
South Africa646 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
On March 05 2011 18:07 Touch wrote: Imbalances aside, anyone really disklike the feel of the new maps? These dark/gloomy colored maps sort of cut the fun and comfort level of each game. There's something nice about the irony of a paradise of green grass and waterfalls with armies big as a mother fucker smashing each other to pieces. Yeah, Slag Pits and Typhon Peaks suck. You needn't even mention imbalances considering the back doors to each spawn's natural, it's pretty obvious. I don't like how dark and desolate the new maps seem to be either. On topic: This looks like terrible design. They should really fix this before it goes live. Anyone post something on the B.net forums yet? | ||
|
theBIGdog
United States41 Posts
| ||
|
Guppers
United States94 Posts
First of all people cried about terran drops on the cliff in temple. Then people not only learned that it wasn't the end of the world and beatable, but they also realized they could do drops onto that cliff with their own race, and eventually the QQing subsided. And you have a 33% chance of having a close spawn simmilar to stepps... but there is no more stepps so you're just saying that having a map on the ladder that allows people to play a close spawn game is utterly ridiculous and shouldn't even be included in the game. If you are one of these people you probably didn't realize that you have the option of setting your map preferences, just take this one out and problem solved. I enjoy playing this game the way god and blizzard intented, if every starting scenario was tailored to give me my idea circumstances and advantages then it would lose a lot of fun. If 3 square meter of game terrain is game ruining, then perhaps, my friend, you need a bit more practice. | ||
|
SnowSC2
United States678 Posts
On March 05 2011 18:54 Guppers wrote: When will people just stop QQing about stuff like this. First of all people cried about terran drops on the cliff in temple. Then people not only learned that it wasn't the end of the world and beatable, but they also realized they could do drops onto that cliff with their own race, and eventually the QQing subsided. This provided racial imbalance, even if its slight its something to be dealt with which brings me to my next point.. I enjoy playing this game the way god and blizzard intented, if every starting scenario was tailored to give me my idea circumstances and advantages then it would lose a lot of fun. If 3 square meter of game terrain is game ruining, then perhaps, my friend, you need a bit more practice. If blizzard intended the game to be perfect in how it was upon release starcraft would die, its a game that will constantly be improved over years of feedback, discussion and practice. There will be imbalance, qq, patching, shifts in the metagame, new imbalances or old ones yet to be found and the cycle repeats. No one says the distance is game ruining, its just not liked by the majority. Everyone complaining, as bad or as good as it may be is an ever-present and essential part of the growth of the game and community. Your coming into a thread about a purposed possible imbalance on a map and them complaining that there is discussion about this in the thread. The "qq" will never stop. its ok. | ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
| ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 05 2011 18:54 Guppers wrote: When will people just stop QQing about stuff like this. First of all people cried about terran drops on the cliff in temple. Then people not only learned that it wasn't the end of the world and beatable, but they also realized they could do drops onto that cliff with their own race, and eventually the QQing subsided. And you have a 33% chance of having a close spawn simmilar to stepps... but there is no more stepps so you're just saying that having a map on the ladder that allows people to play a close spawn game is utterly ridiculous and shouldn't even be included in the game. If you are one of these people you probably didn't realize that you have the option of setting your map preferences, just take this one out and problem solved. I enjoy playing this game the way god and blizzard intented, if every starting scenario was tailored to give me my idea circumstances and advantages then it would lose a lot of fun. If 3 square meter of game terrain is game ruining, then perhaps, my friend, you need a bit more practice. People will stop complaining when we get maps on the ladder that are reasonably fair for all 3 races to play. There's nothing inherently wrong with rush maps (except that they aren't really as fun to play for most players, and aren't fun to watch at the progamer level, which is a big deal for ESPORTS), but this is a bad rush map. There's literally no option for a third base, so that takes away the variety. Further, terran has a massively strong tactic available to them that is incredibly hard for the other races to deal with on this map, but not on others (an easily holdable siege tank location within range of the mineral line of your opponent in his main?) It's not reasonable for zerg players, nor protoss players for terran to have this kind of advantage on this map. | ||
|
GoodNewsJim
United States122 Posts
| ||
|
Guppers
United States94 Posts
On March 05 2011 19:35 Whitewing wrote: People will stop complaining when we get maps on the ladder that are reasonably fair for all 3 races to play. There's nothing inherently wrong with rush maps (except that they aren't really as fun to play for most players, and aren't fun to watch at the progamer level, which is a big deal for ESPORTS), but this is a bad rush map. There's literally no option for a third base, so that takes away the variety. Further, terran has a massively strong tactic available to them that is incredibly hard for the other races to deal with on this map, but not on others (an easily holdable siege tank location within range of the mineral line of your opponent in his main?) It's not reasonable for zerg players, nor protoss players for terran to have this kind of advantage on this map. k, so I may be ignorant on this point, I know it's common for terran to use siege drops to be annoying but in this case I think a number of points make it not unreasonable. it's a low ground situation so they have to have some form of spotting, and since people learned to handle siege dropping on temple high ground I'm not sure which part of this terrain feature makes it more imba. also is it out of the question for protoss to harass there with the underused collosus drop? I don't see why not. and finally.. just like any harassment scenario, it's not like the terran teleported his tank there, with proper spotting you should be able to deal with this like anything else. tl;dr: this map has been out like what a week? why don't you actively try to solve your problems first, like coming out ahead in a situation that you feel favors another race. Stop requesting that the bar be lowered to your level and instead go home and set your own bar twice as high, then really show em what you can do. (if you didn't care for my choice of language, play against this "abuse" over and over again until it ceases to be an issue and you can respond approprately on instinct) | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 05 2011 20:09 Guppers wrote: + Show Spoiler + On March 05 2011 19:35 Whitewing wrote: People will stop complaining when we get maps on the ladder that are reasonably fair for all 3 races to play. There's nothing inherently wrong with rush maps (except that they aren't really as fun to play for most players, and aren't fun to watch at the progamer level, which is a big deal for ESPORTS), but this is a bad rush map. There's literally no option for a third base, so that takes away the variety. Further, terran has a massively strong tactic available to them that is incredibly hard for the other races to deal with on this map, but not on others (an easily holdable siege tank location within range of the mineral line of your opponent in his main?) It's not reasonable for zerg players, nor protoss players for terran to have this kind of advantage on this map. k, so I may be ignorant on this point, I know it's common for terran to use siege drops to be annoying but in this case I think a number of points make it not unreasonable. it's a low ground situation so they have to have some form of spotting, and since people learned to handle siege dropping on temple high ground I'm not sure which part of this terrain feature makes it more imba. also is it out of the question for protoss to harass there with the underused collosus drop? I don't see why not. and finally.. just like any harassment scenario, it's not like the terran teleported his tank there, with proper spotting you should be able to deal with this like anything else. tl;dr: this map has been out like what a week? why don't you actively try to solve your problems first, like coming out ahead in a situation that you feel favors another race. Stop requesting that the bar be lowered to your level and instead go home and set your own bar twice as high, then really show em what you can do. (if you didn't care for my choice of language, play against this "abuse" over and over again until it ceases to be an issue and you can respond approprately on instinct) Timings are way off. First, a colossus on his own is fodder, Colossus drops are only useful if you stay away from every unit terran has. A couple marauders will kill it really fast, and warp prisms are made of paper. Second, Tanks sieging a line with marines guarding it are way stronger than a colossus with some gateway units doing harass with this strategy. Tanks are meant to be stupidly strong once entrenched, colossi are meant to use their ability to move to stay away from attackers and run away when facing a strong force, and are therefore weaker than tanks vs. anything but pure bio. Third, it doesn't matter how strong your spotting is, if terran goes for a strong one base with marines and tanks, you aren't stopping him from getting to that spot with what you have as protoss, you need to hold your ramp to stop them from walking into your base. You go out there to meet them on the way, and you'll get rolled. | ||
|
Bommes
Germany1226 Posts
| ||
|
Saechiis
Netherlands4989 Posts
| ||
|
gnurk
Norway50 Posts
| ||
|
Mr_Kyo
United States269 Posts
All you have to do is either attack his main or engage the tanks that are hitting you. Unlike steppes of war, the tanks are not protecting the route to their main. | ||
|
iChau
United States1210 Posts
On March 06 2011 00:34 Mr_Kyo wrote: Super imbalance? Not even lost temple was super imbalanced. Posts like this make me want to stop coming to these forums. All you have to do is either attack his main or engage the tanks that are hitting you. Unlike steppes of war, the tanks are not protecting the route to their main. It's not that simple.. | ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://s.sk-gaming.com/image/image/d7185d022c9f1cb9l.jpg) -natural far from ramp: very hard to defend -gigantic ledge in the middle of the map; tank and collosi heaven -useless low ground middle with a useless xel'naga tower. Those positions are supose to give you a strategic advantage while this one puts you at a disadvantage. -random hallway in the back to make nice little tank pushes that are extremely difficult to stop -most convenient third base is the gold, which is close by air distance but far by ground; it's on the low ground. I think it's a pretty terrible map. | ||
|
ishboh
United States954 Posts
| ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
| ||
|
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
On March 05 2011 23:42 Saechiis wrote: You can siege someone's main on Xel'Naga Caverns too. If your opponent can run siege tanks across the map and siege up next to your base uncontested though, you have probably already lost the game. Units from your base can easily hit his tanks before they can siege up in that spot, you need to prevent it from happening. this is exactlywhat I was about to post but somebody else put it down first. It sucks, but you really cant let them get that close without trying to punish them for it. | ||
|
Zorgaz
Sweden2951 Posts
Some people might not like it, personnel i don't mind it that much. I actually like the map, its pretty balanced. Expect close positions for Zerg i guess. | ||
|
Bergys
Sweden337 Posts
On March 06 2011 01:22 ZeromuS wrote: this is exactlywhat I was about to post but somebody else put it down first. It sucks, but you really cant let them get that close without trying to punish them for it. This is not even close however, at Xel'Naga/Metal and probably more maps I've forgotten the only way to siege someone is to siege up in their natural expansion, forcing them to take the route where you're most likely to have your army making it a non-issue. On slag pits however a terran can simply send a medivac to that location/take the path to your ramp and force you to engage in the middle of the map. Might not be too much of a problem for zerg but for protoss it's suicide engaging a terran in a open area where you cannot place good force fields. It's not reasonable to have to defend both your ramp and a remote location at the same time, making it imbalanced imo. If the siege spot wasn't in such a odd location it'd be fine, but this greatly favors terrans and should be removed. | ||
|
GriMeR
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
Valckrie
United Kingdom533 Posts
| ||
|
ihasaKAROT
Netherlands4730 Posts
| ||
|
Cops
United Kingdom172 Posts
| ||
|
OhMyGawd
United States264 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:04 GameTime wrote: I wouldn't say it's imbalanced, just a strong strategy. ....How long have you played Terran? I think it has gotten to your head. | ||
|
Xadar
497 Posts
| ||
|
gr8ape
Canada302 Posts
HUGE MAPS LOL HUUUUUUGEEEEEE MAPS WILL SOLVE ALL OF SC2's PROBLEMS!!!!!!!1111 User was warned for this post User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
iAmJeffReY
United States4262 Posts
It's not imba, it's a well thought out strategy. | ||
|
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
| ||
|
iAmJeffReY
United States4262 Posts
On March 06 2011 02:12 gr8ape wrote: I cant believe how fucking retarded the people at blizzard are for designing these maps. HEY GUYS LETS MAKE A MAP WITH A THIRD BASE FUCKING FAR BUT LET THE MAP BE HUGE ENOUGH THAT ZERG CAN COUNTERATTACK WITH EASE WITH PRETTY MUCH ANY UNIT COMBINATION, EFFECTIVELY PREVENTING OTHER RACES FROM EXPANDING BUT LETTING THEM. Lets also extend this concept to the other maps guys! Huge maps, far expansions, impossible to get and protect for toss and terran but easy as shit for zerg to navigate around the map! HUGE MAPS LOL HUUUUUUGEEEEEE MAPS WILL SOLVE ALL OF SC2's PROBLEMS!!!!!!!1111 I will give you that -- cross map on slag is rather hard vs Z. However, close positions is just downright insane how fast I can hit and drop on them.. Rage less. Strategies are more map dependent then people make them out to be. | ||
|
Flyingpants
79 Posts
| ||
|
Cent
Canada155 Posts
| ||
|
Reason.SC2
Canada1047 Posts
The only way I can really think to stop this is to catch the tanks and engage before they are able to set up over there, or be super aggressive trying to keep T contained or on the back foot. The real joke is that slag was presented as a "more macro-focused version of metalopolis" whoever wrote that needs to get canned lol | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
NoisyNinja
United States991 Posts
On March 05 2011 14:24 eVolvE342 wrote: if you would read the post you would know its not a TvT imba cry. Of course TvT isnt imba. thats not what this thread is trying to say. It is saying the map position is imbalanced regardless of what race the opponent is. Please read the thread before making needless remarks Dude, chill, he's making a joke. Only fools would claim imbalance in a mirror match up where everyone has the same units. It boils down to who can counter who harder and who can be the most creative with the same set of units. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
| ||
|
laLAlA[uC]
Canada963 Posts
You can also abuse this cliff with cliff walkers like Colossus. It's just a map artefact that benefits terran kind of like how wide open areas benefit zerg. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
On March 07 2011 04:28 laLAlA[uC] wrote: You can do this to the natural on Steppes. You can also abuse this cliff with cliff walkers like Colossus. It's just a map artefact that benefits terran kind of like how wide open areas benefit zerg. Yes, you can do this to the natural, as in a few maps. However this is the MAIN base. I feel there is a big difference there | ||
|
EmilA
Denmark4618 Posts
| ||
|
MindRush
Romania916 Posts
imagine the game as TvP or TvZ how do you counter those tanks? | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
| ||
|
Betalump
United States109 Posts
I have no idea how to get to mutas fast enough to defend the cliff without dying to early harass. (have tried expanding to opposite main... I still can't defend my main) Sadly I've resorted to roach rushes in close positions on that map (zvt) I still don't see how the map is any more interesting or balanced than shakuras and even some of the other old maps. (masters - random) | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
Really, though, it's a pretty obscure location. While they're busy shelling your main with 5 Siege Tanks, go kill them :D Although the map isn't great in general, so I guess it doesn't matter. | ||
|
antz0r
Australia168 Posts
| ||
|
MrBadMan
93 Posts
| ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
On March 07 2011 11:38 Zeke50100 wrote: My question is, can Colossi hit the main CC? It looks like it might just *barely* be possible, but meh. Really, though, it's a pretty obscure location. While they're busy shelling your main with 5 Siege Tanks, go kill them :D Although the map isn't great in general, so I guess it doesn't matter. The only time its super out of the way is when the spawns are the super close ones. The other 2 spawns you can actually get to the spot on your way to there base. You can just make a turn at the last second to go to the spot instead of there natural. I have been using this ledge to spread the hate of the abuse in ladder games and only have lost 1 time and only because I was already down 40 supply and it was fairly late game and even then it still did serious damage. | ||
|
AlphaWhale
Australia328 Posts
On March 05 2011 15:16 GeNeSiDe wrote: People complain because you can't go hatchfirst in TvZ: my reply to that is that your not meant to go blind hatchfirst every game, i like zergs like you because i always scout close pos. first so if i discover a z goin hatchfirst block expo and 2rax pressure works a charm...learn dynamic play not cookie-cutter builds! Oh the ironing. | ||
|
Flyingpants
79 Posts
Ya, alpha, i love these terrens who play with 40 APM, do the same overpowered crap abusive crap every game, and always tell zerg to "learn to play". What is zerg supposed to do other then hatch first? Pool first is basically an automatic loss anyways, terren is able to make bunkers at the ramp, and then you are stuck 1 base and you have lost. Or he makes blue flame hellions, or banshees, or whatever, all of which is impossible to defend on one base without depth, extra income/production, etc. | ||
|
Dhalphir
Australia1305 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:38 meRz wrote: Is this possible at all spawning locations? this is the key issue if its possible at all spawn points, its not imbalanced, just a very strong strategy on a particular map. if its only possible at certain spawn points, then that is a map imbalance and either needs to be addressed in the form of making it possible at all spawn points or impossible on all. | ||
|
speakerbox
Canada453 Posts
| ||
|
Deathmanbob
United States2356 Posts
| ||
|
Belegurth
165 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:38 meRz wrote: Is this possible at all spawning locations? is it my eyes or is your post background is actually "teamliquid-blue" ? | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On March 06 2011 00:46 Steel wrote: This also applies for the opponent.I don't think this map is very balanced or fun at all, really. + Show Spoiler + -natural far from ramp: very hard to defend -gigantic ledge in the middle of the map; tank and collosi heaven You can use mutas or corruptors.-useless low ground middle with a useless xel'naga tower. Those positions are supose to give you a strategic advantage while this one puts you at a disadvantage. Then don't take it.-random hallway in the back to make nice little tank pushes that are extremely difficult to stop If you know that he is going for it, you should be able to stop it.-most convenient third base is the gold, which is close by air distance but far by ground; it's on the low ground. The same applies for the opponent. There is another gold on the other side of the map, too.I think it's a pretty terrible map. I think it's a good map since we don't need just standard macro default generic normal common maps. | ||
|
Tetryl
United States13 Posts
| ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
Edit: oops, forgot about other races... Ok its imba. | ||
|
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
On March 08 2011 18:25 Tetryl wrote: you can hit the main in metalopolis too Pretty much this. Although I fully agree that the maps sucks balls, the op is hardly proof. If you have to siege directly below the cliff to hit anything important, then there isn't a problem. Roaches/hydras/infestors/any ranged unit can hit them from above in that position. The problem in steppes is that you can siege up the nat, and no zerg units can hit them from the nat....kind of like the nat is slag...but I digress. At least in slag, you can move down one of the 5 ramps going to your nat, and get to the tanks unlike steppes. | ||
|
danielsan
Romania399 Posts
| ||
|
fearus
China2164 Posts
On March 08 2011 18:25 Tetryl wrote: you can hit the main in metalopolis too ditto with Xel Naga... | ||
|
Teeny
Austria885 Posts
First map ever i had to thump down. | ||
|
zhengsta
United States126 Posts
| ||
|
EmilA
Denmark4618 Posts
No comparison. You can only hit mains if you capture his natural. This siege-up happens very far from the base entrance and natural. | ||
|
Moody
United States750 Posts
| ||
|
UruzuNine
Canada162 Posts
On March 08 2011 17:21 Dhalphir wrote: this is the key issue if its possible at all spawn points, its not imbalanced, just a very strong strategy on a particular map. if its only possible at certain spawn points, then that is a map imbalance and either needs to be addressed in the form of making it possible at all spawn points or impossible on all. Anyone who's even looked at the map overview can see that it's possible against all spawning locations. Therefore, no point in even assuming an "if" scenario. It's not map imbalance, just really annoying to deal with. | ||
|
UruzuNine
Canada162 Posts
On March 07 2011 15:05 Flyingpants wrote: Ya, alpha, i love these terrens who play with 40 APM, do the same overpowered crap abusive crap every game, and always tell zerg to "learn to play". What is zerg supposed to do other then hatch first? Pool first is basically an automatic loss anyways, terren is able to make bunkers at the ramp, and then you are stuck 1 base and you have lost. Or he makes blue flame hellions, or banshees, or whatever, all of which is impossible to defend on one base without depth, extra income/production, etc. Posts like this make my head hurt. A Zerg that says pool-first builds result in an automatic loss is a Zerg that probably shouldn't be giving build analysis in the first place. I recommend you go watch pro-level Zergs go pool-first in tournaments such as the GSL to learn how it's actually perfectly reasonable to do -- and in fact is considered less risky than hatch-first. | ||
|
AimForTheBushes
United States1760 Posts
On March 09 2011 04:30 UruzuNine wrote: Posts like this make my head hurt. A Zerg that says pool-first builds result in an automatic loss is a Zerg that probably shouldn't be giving build analysis in the first place. I recommend you go watch pro-level Zergs go pool-first in tournaments such as the GSL to learn how it's actually perfectly reasonable to do -- and in fact is considered less risky than hatch-first. Agreed. Anyone who says pool first = insta-loss is just simply incorrect. | ||
|
karma227
Canada15 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:05 eVolvE342 wrote: I am not saying that my particular game is the reason it should be fixed... I am saying the fact that you can siege someones main from the side of their base while not being in their base should not be possible. Also I do not see how having a missile turret would be that good.. he could easily kill off a missile turret from his position. The turret would force the vikings to back away and thus rob him of the vision that he needs to continue to siege the CC and few SCV's he can reach. I wouldn't say this is imbalanced at all but more like you gave him the opportunity to get into that position and he took it. Proper scouting/control of your main base would have easily stopped this. I agree that it can be a frustrating strategy but so can a 4gate or a 6pool or a 3 rax push etc etc ad nausum, you just need to learn how to deal with and eventually negate this. Also, if this is a huge issue Bliz will be fixing it in the next patch/micro patch. In the meantime just go into your 1v1 settings and choose not to play this map. | ||
|
Kyuss420
Canada36 Posts
| ||
|
MoreFaSho
United States1427 Posts
On March 07 2011 12:20 MrBadMan wrote: There's a reason I voted this map down as zerg after a single test game. Take out Jungle Basin, and give us such a trash map instead? GG Blizzard. I'm pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about. This map is 100x better than jungle basin for any zerg MU except maybe ZvZ. Don't get me wrong, it's not a good map, but the problem is pretty similar to Jungle Basin in that there's no expansions to take. | ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
Not every game should be high economy. I enjoy all sorts of play-styles; rush, low econ timing strategy, high economy macro, material advantage, tempo based, positional ... I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers but the pursuit for the perfect map pool is not one where anyone can do anything on every map equally. Certain maps will favor certain play-styles in certain match-ups. I think this is a good thing for a strategy game. It requires players to have multiple strategies in their arsenal - even ones they're uncomfortable with. | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:40 kasumimi wrote: This is definitely not imbalanced. This seems like interesting, creative and fun strategy unfolding on one of the cool and well-made blizzard maps. On a serious note, this issue was present in Steppes of war also. You shouldn't have much issues if you see it coming and place your own tanks there, or stop the push before he gets underneath your main cliff. Also, as a T user you can abuse this yourself -_- Of course it's imba because you can't do it on every position on the map no ? The one who spawn in the right location will have a big advantage on his opponent. Actually I like this map, it's pretty agressive while still being pretty good macro wise, It would be even better if they were no fucking rock on the gold. | ||
|
GreatestThreat
United States631 Posts
On March 09 2011 05:14 TimeSpiral wrote: I'm not for or against this map, but I'm pretty sure Blizzard intends to have a variety of play-styles encouraged by the map pool. Not every game should be high economy. I enjoy all sorts of play-styles; rush, low econ timing strategy, high economy macro, material advantage, tempo based, positional ... I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers but the pursuit for the perfect map pool is not one where anyone can do anything on every map equally. Certain maps will favor certain play-styles in certain match-ups. I think this is a good thing for a strategy game. It requires players to have multiple strategies in their arsenal - even ones they're uncomfortable with. Seconded. Though whether Slag Pits is a good fit for the map pool is still debatable. | ||
|
stolensheep
United Kingdom306 Posts
On March 09 2011 05:14 TimeSpiral wrote: I'm not for or against this map, but I'm pretty sure Blizzard intends to have a variety of play-styles encouraged by the map pool. Not every game should be high economy. I enjoy all sorts of play-styles; rush, low econ timing strategy, high economy macro, material advantage, tempo based, positional ... I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers but the pursuit for the perfect map pool is not one where anyone can do anything on every map equally. Certain maps will favor certain play-styles in certain match-ups. I think this is a good thing for a strategy game. It requires players to have multiple strategies in their arsenal - even ones they're uncomfortable with. This map is truly awful, It's actually worse than steppes. Maps should be open to all playstyles, they shouldn't dictate that you HAVE to play a low econ allin game and they shouldn't dictate that you HAVE to play a huge long macro game, and Slag Pits basically forces every game into 1 playstyle and, in my opinion, the way maps should be designed is that 1 map gives you several options of playstyle, not several maps giving you 1 option of playstyle, there's exceptions to the rule, there always is, but for the majority, these close spawn maps encourage and basically force quicker games. | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
| ||
|
eksert
France656 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:01 NoisyNinja wrote: I wouldn't go to say "IMBA NERF OR FIX PLZ", but it is an awkward positioning. The only reason he can do that is because he has vikings for sight. I see that it is around 9 minutes into the game, and as far as I can tell, you don't have an Engineering bay. My general rule of thumb for Terran is: 1. Expand by 10 minutes 2. Turrets on mineral line by 10 minutes 3. Make sure to be creative. indicate your level too please.. 1500 diamond only? or gold? | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
| ||
|
GhettoSheep
United States150 Posts
As zerg i think it would be even easier to deal with. Terran cannot maintain air control against mutas, and lings are even better at flanking than marines. Im not a zerg player but I think the key would be to engage with your lings first, getting the marines to attack them while your mutas come in and kill the tanks, or something like that. I dont think this is a problem like shakuras as there is plenty of open ground behind the tanks, and not just a narrow choke that zerg cant get to. I still hate the map tho, and it does have positional imbalances relating to close distance spawns | ||
|
Yamulo
United States2096 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:01 NoisyNinja wrote: I wouldn't go to say "IMBA NERF OR FIX PLZ", but it is an awkward positioning. The only reason he can do that is because he has vikings for sight. I see that it is around 9 minutes into the game, and as far as I can tell, you don't have an Engineering bay. My general rule of thumb for Terran is: 1. Expand by 10 minutes 2. Turrets on mineral line by 10 minutes 3. Make sure to be creative. How is that not an inbalance? Clearly that is going to be abused by whom? Terran.... or colossi do you really want to play with something like that or drastically change your style for a already horrible blizzard ladder map or would you like to have them remove or fix this map? | ||
|
Manimal_pro
Romania991 Posts
| ||
|
theBOOCH
United States832 Posts
| ||
|
Wochtulka
Czech Republic66 Posts
| ||
|
mskaa
Denmark155 Posts
| ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
| ||
|
theBOOCH
United States832 Posts
| ||
|
Noli
United Kingdom179 Posts
Catz did a good review on this map basically ended up saying Zerg can't lose it's completely broken. | ||
|
xJaCEx
155 Posts
| ||
|
MiKTeX
United States234 Posts
On March 14 2011 15:51 xJaCEx wrote: Can't wait for a new map pool I have no clue what they where thinking with some of the new maps and they took out a few good ones for them and left maps like dq and scrap in. Has anyone been abusing blink stalkers on this map? stalkers arent very strong in a straight up fight, so you want a lot of distance between you and your opponent so that if he does move out you can counter attack with time to get back and defend or to pick off several units and weaken their push before they get to your base the base setup seems to imply that blink stalkers might be ok but honestly id be too scared to use a stalker-focused strategy on it because the map is just so small | ||
|
bigwig123
163 Posts
| ||
|
Creegz
Canada354 Posts
| ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
On March 14 2011 17:56 Creegz wrote:What you need to do is have a way to block his viewing viking. Turrets or Marines will work well for that. Why the hell do people keep saying this? how stupid are you guys? Can you at least read a few posts in and see why that is NOT viable?On March 09 2011 05:14 TimeSpiral wrote: I don't have a huge issue with that except the game is terribly imbalanced right now and simply doesn't support maps like this.I'm not for or against this map, but I'm pretty sure Blizzard intends to have a variety of play-styles encouraged by the map pool. Not every game should be high economy. I enjoy all sorts of play-styles; rush, low econ timing strategy, high economy macro, material advantage, tempo based, positional ... I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers but the pursuit for the perfect map pool is not one where anyone can do anything on every map equally. Certain maps will favor certain play-styles in certain match-ups. I think this is a good thing for a strategy game. It requires players to have multiple strategies in their arsenal - even ones they're uncomfortable with. Maybe if Blizzard balanced the game more this wouldn't be as big of an issue. In SC1 maps can still be quite imbalanced due to cliffs/chokes/expo_location/rush distance though, just not as terrible as SC2. For this reason I doubt they will ever offer maps that have strong difference in play style but still remain balanced. ———————————————— Slag pits is such a nasty map. One of the biggest issues is that you can spawn close positions (yet they made shakuras not cross-positions? WTF?), which has like a rush time probably 30% faster than steppes or war or something... it's almost like blood bath rush distance. Blizzard just makes a bunch of complete BS maps... WTF is wrong in their brains? Map after map after map - Steppes of War, Desert Oasis, Blistering Sands, Lost Temple, Kulas Ravine, Jungle Basin, Shattered temple (close positions), Terminus (just WTF?) Combine that with the fact their racial balance progress is so damn slow and poor even back in beta, which was like 5 times faster than it is now. | ||
|
Arcanewinds
United Kingdom197 Posts
However, if you elevate marines onto the highground, it can get pretty tough to deal with. | ||
|
Termit
Sweden3466 Posts
| ||
|
Nnug
9 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/w4Qf3.png) | ||
|
mcmartini
Australia1972 Posts
| ||
|
DaemonX
545 Posts
The actual map feature isn't an issue though. The ability to shutdown someone's gas with tanks in a certain position IF they have sight...honestly, that's a legitmate map feature. I do often do the same with hydras on the high ground in traditional LT, and it's hardly imba. If you may have it happen to you or may not based off your spawn, that's total crap and needs fixing. @The people qqing about new maps: The GSL maps are a nice change, but they get SO BORING if you play on them a lot, as every fucking one of them is almost god damned identical, with the difference being what cutesy trick they have on your ramp / natural. GSL thinks that having 4 Xel-Nagas and two hidden naturals are THE ANSWER to map balance, and it isn't. Not that these are bad features, but they aren't the end-all of SC2 map design. | ||
|
xAPOCALYPSEx
1418 Posts
Now THAT looks ridiculous. This map has to be fixed, it's already arguably the worst map in the pool (aside from maybe DQ), and if terrans make good use of that spot, it looks pretty invulnerable and like an easy win, especially in TvZ where the zerg may not have the proper units to deal with this yet. Also, can this gap be shot across by roaches? | ||
|
azarat
Australia155 Posts
10 o'clock position (top left spawn) Command Center/Nexus/Hatchery CANNOT be hit by Siege Tanks on the low ground at the gold base. Range 6 units CAN hit Siege Tanks at this position from the main base, range 5 units CANNOT. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Zc62x.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nMbhg.jpg) 7 o'clock position (bottom left spawn) Command Center/Nexus/Hatchery CAN be hit by Siege Tanks on the low ground at the gold base. Range 6 units CAN hit Siege Tanks at this position from the main base, range 5 units CANNOT. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kGxP2.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/C4qCm.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7zQ2c.jpg) 1 o'clock position (top right spawn) Command Center/Nexus/Hatchery CANNOT be hit by Siege Tanks on the low ground at the gold base. Range 6 units CAN hit Siege Tanks at this position from the main base, range 5 units CANNOT. Incidentally, larvae that spawn from a Hatchery and crawl to the left edge can be hit by Siege Tanks and thus splash the Hatchery. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/L5KqM.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rK6qP.jpg) 4 o'clock position (bottom right spawn) Command Center/Nexus/Hatchery CAN be hit by Siege Tanks on the low ground at the gold base. Range 6 units CAN hit Siege Tanks at this position from the main base, range 5 units CAN as well. The CC/Nexus/Hatchery actually looks out of range of the siege tanks, but one tank position can actually hit it. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IAlsR.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8hlI7.jpg) I have screenshots of the range of the Siege Tanks from each position that I can upload if necessary. Obviously the low ground not in gold position can hit the CC/Nexus/Hatchery from every spawn as it is is closer than the gold base low ground. There are also visible differences in the number of mineral patches that can be hit from the low ground at each position. This map definitely has worse positions to spawn in, particular the bottom two bases that can be sieged from the low ground at the gold. EDIT: Screenshots added. | ||
|
headies
United States63 Posts
But seriously, down-vote it. Terrible map. I like some of the design concepts of it, but there is too many glaring flaws. And spawning close position is like playing on shrinkage. | ||
|
archon256
United States363 Posts
| ||
|
Nazeron
Canada1046 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
TurtlePerson2
United States218 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:04 GameTime wrote: I wouldn't say it's imbalanced, just a strong strategy. This is pretty much the definition of imbalanced. In "symmetrical" positions your opponent has an option that you don't have in a mirror matchup. How is this not imbalanced? | ||
|
DevlinDarkforge
United States30 Posts
| ||
|
ArcticMuse
Australia93 Posts
| ||
|
Joedaddy
United States1948 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:19 NoisyNinja wrote: The turrets could just deny vision (by shooting the vikings) or just stall long enough for your tanks to get into position. They would stall by providing a target for the opponent's tanks. I put 2-3 turrets on the mineral line to defend against drops and air harassment. I agree with your second point though. Vikings can provide vision of the high ground without being in range of the turrets. Turrets will not prevent tank/viking from gaining vision on any map in any position that I am aware of. Unless they attack command on the turret, the AI will prioritize your tanks when they get in range. | ||
|
nytelynx
Australia56 Posts
| ||
|
annYeong(o11)
Canada784 Posts
| ||
|
BigJoe
United States210 Posts
| ||
|
PrideTV
Vietnam434 Posts
-Pride | ||
|
dekuschrub
United States2069 Posts
but im gonna start tanking that up now lol | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6565 Posts
| ||
|
thehitman
1105 Posts
| ||
|
Sahand
United Kingdom114 Posts
On March 05 2011 10:38 meRz wrote: Is this possible at all spawning locations? cant say for sure but it looks like the map is symmetrical (not rotational obviously) | ||
|
Warpath
Canada1242 Posts
| ||
|
Gojira621
United States374 Posts
| ||
|
Ydriel
Italy516 Posts
| ||
|
Eppa!
Sweden4641 Posts
| ||
|
CatNzHat
United States1599 Posts
LT thor drop wasn't too bad imho, if you scouted it coming you could deny it fairly easily, the tank drop however was a bit too strong vs zerg. Hopefully they remove slag pits next patch, as it's only really fun in ffa :D | ||
|
Superouman
France2195 Posts
On April 26 2011 23:14 Alejandrisha wrote: If you can do it from every spawn position, it's not a map imbalance. You can siege a guy's whole base from that natural on metalopolis. Ever heard anyone saying this is imbalanced? No. If you have enemy tanks in your natural and shooting at your main minerals, you have already lost the game from several minutes. | ||
zatic
Zurich15357 Posts
On April 26 2011 23:14 Alejandrisha wrote: If you can do it from every spawn position, it's not a map imbalance. You can siege a guy's whole base from that natural on metalopolis. Ever heard anyone saying this is imbalanced? No. OK here you go: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=8284644 Don't bump an old thread if you don't have anything to add. | ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Grubby5290 FrodaN2861 B2W.Neo836 Beastyqt543 mouzStarbuck269 XaKoH  87Chillindude32 Mew2King28 PiLiPiLi26 |
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs Solar
Clem vs Classic
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
