EPTelevengaming's SC2 Midwest Championship $2000+ - Page 3
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
nGBeast
United States914 Posts
| ||
|
CatsPajamas
United States337 Posts
On January 25 2011 00:51 Nizzy wrote: Cats is pretty devotes a good 40 hours/week into shoutcasting. He's probably casted more games in SC2 than you've played. With all his experience I'm positive he'd know which games would give really good games for ALL RACES. ^_^ Anyway, I'm less sure of the iCCup maps right now. Many are just fine, but the GSL maps are so freaking good its just hard to pass those up. My ideal map list from a caster's perspective would be: Metalopolis Lost Temple Xel Naga Caverns Shakuras Plateau Crossfire Tal Darim Altar Crevasse Legacy of the Void | ||
|
nGBeast
United States914 Posts
| ||
|
Nizzy
United States839 Posts
On January 25 2011 16:23 nGBeast wrote: I don't know if adding so many is right, maybe one or 2 because most players don't practice those if at all and adding 3 or 4 seems like over hall That's a good point Beast. Maybe we should do 4-5 ladder maps, 1-2 iCCup Maps, and 1-2 GSL maps? | ||
|
CatsPajamas
United States337 Posts
On January 26 2011 01:41 Nizzy wrote: That's a good point Beast. Maybe we should do 4-5 ladder maps, 1-2 iCCup Maps, and 1-2 GSL maps? If you take 2 GSL maps, after looking at the updated list, do Tal Darim Altar and Legacy of the Void. You won't be disappointed with some of the matches you'll get. Trust me. | ||
|
ShinyGerbil
Canada519 Posts
On January 20 2011 09:33 FrodaN wrote: GO GERBILLLLLLL  yayayayay ^_^ in response to maps, my personal preference is no GSL maps (right now i'm not even considering iccup, just because as an organization gsl has way more credibility). But if 1-2 of the gsl maps that are fairly similar gameplay wise to existing blizzard maps were introduced, I wouldn't be mad (until i lose on them heheh) Maybe you could even have some rule like at most 1 gsl map can be played per set, so that players who aren't as familiar with them won't feel as disadvantaged. | ||
|
Antimage
Canada1293 Posts
| ||
|
CatsPajamas
United States337 Posts
On January 26 2011 02:03 Antimage wrote: Take out Crossfire please, I don't even know why that map is in the map pool - large ramp like scrap station and the opening to the natural is too large so you can't even wall that off as terran or protoss. It's not in. So far only official ladder maps are in the map pool. Other maps that have been thrown around are just ideas. So have no fear! What maps would you like to see? | ||
|
how
United States538 Posts
| ||
|
vaderseven
United States2556 Posts
I love the GSL maps (don't really care for the iCCup maps myself) but I just see better games happening on a map where I have 300 games played instead of 25. That being said, more important than what maps is that a pool be finalized soon. If there is going to be iccup or gsl maps please say so soon so that we can get our practice in. Love how this event is looking so far. Domino (v1dom) looks very organized and dedicated. This event is going to be awesome because of that. | ||
|
Nizzy
United States839 Posts
If most people want to just use ladder maps (which it seems like that is whats wanted the majority)... we cannot just pick "5" ladder maps because person "x" thinks they are the balanced. We would have to allow all ladder maps. What we could do is before every match have each player talk really fast and veto 2 or 3 maps. So then each player v player has like 3-4 maps to choose from for their bo1, or bo3. Zergs aren't going to want Delta Q. Terrans are. So is it really balanced or just bad for 1 race? Half the ladder maps are bad but if you're going to say "ladder maps only" who is to say which ones are really balanced? | ||
|
CatsPajamas
United States337 Posts
| ||
|
Antimage
Canada1293 Posts
On January 27 2011 02:44 Nizzy wrote: Well if people don't want iCCup/gsl because of limited practice I can agree with that. If most people want to just use ladder maps (which it seems like that is whats wanted the majority)... we cannot just pick "5" ladder maps because person "x" thinks they are the balanced. We would have to allow all ladder maps. What we could do is before every match have each player talk really fast and veto 2 or 3 maps. So then each player v player has like 3-4 maps to choose from for their bo1, or bo3. Zergs aren't going to want Delta Q. Terrans are. So is it really balanced or just bad for 1 race? Half the ladder maps are bad but if you're going to say "ladder maps only" who is to say which ones are really balanced? Better that maps that have established imbalance features that all players know how to take advantage of be disallowed - than maps where there may be imbalance features, but haven't been explored enough to take advantage of. There are strategies in ZvP on scrap station that can only be stopped by assuming it is being done (no scouting window), and taking an immediate disadvantage in order to have the capability of beating it, wihle taking a huge setback in the mid-game if that strategy wasn't being used - and frankly, I'd have to say that my ZvP on scrap station is much better than my PvP on it, and if I had to play this map, I'd learn ZvP and ZvZ for the tournament. | ||
|
Alizee-
United States845 Posts
| ||
|
Nizzy
United States839 Posts
I agree with everything you're saying, I really do, but anyway you try to type it out...it still goes back to my original point. You're saying remove scrap because its impossible for race X to win against race X unless that's all you prepare for. So are we going to only allow Protoss favored maps because Toss can't beat Zerg on "X"? The same could be said on X for Terran vs X, and etc for Zerg until you have 0 maps left. I'm a Terran that struggles on Xel Naga vs Zerg but near impossible for me to lose on Delta Quad. So the Zerg I play in round X, will veto Delta, I will Veto Xel Naga. If each player gets 3 vetos, that leaves a good 3 maps to play on. Each player will probably get similar situations in ladder that they would get on Bnet. I really don't see a more fair way. I think Steppes is a horrible map while some might think its a perfectly balanced smaller map. So I think this veto system with allowing the full 9 ladder maps or whatever + SHAK PLAT if its not currently in the pool is the best option. Here's the starting map per each round: Round of 128: Steppes of War Round of 64: Scrap Station Round of 32: TBA Round of 16:TBA Round of 8: Lost Temple Round of 4: Metalopolis Championship Round: Xel’Naga Caverns I think maps like Steppes/SS probably shouldn't be starting maps. Maybe rotate LT/Metal/XelNaga/ShakPlat or something. | ||
|
CatsPajamas
United States337 Posts
On January 27 2011 04:42 Nizzy wrote: @Antimage Clipped. I think he's saying he'd rather have all the ladder maps, imbalanced ones and all, then introducing new maps that only some players will be able to take advantage of. By the way, I suggest throwing Shakuras Plateau into the list of maps that start rounds. | ||
|
v1dom
159 Posts
We will be detailing how these prizes will be added to the prize pool within the next week or so. On the map note, I have been getting a lot of inquiry into a decision. As the voting is close, it is likely I will add one GSL map to the pool, and allow players one veto per match. I think this is a fair compromise, as people who don't want to play on the GSL map are free to veto it, and those that do will have one veto available for another map (say, Scrap). If the map is the starting map for that round, you will not be able to veto it. That is not the final decision, but what I am leaning toward. I will let the debate continue for awhile longer before making the final call, if anyone has any additional comments or arguements they'd like to make. | ||
|
Antimage
Canada1293 Posts
| ||
|
j0k3r
United States577 Posts
If the budget allows, Day9 + DJWheat are second to none. Or perhaps.. INC CASTING | ||
|
j0k3r
United States577 Posts
| ||
| ||
