|
On April 23 2010 17:04 Tsagacity wrote: It was just brought to my attention that on incineration zone it takes about 10-15 seconds for terran to lift to the gold minerals :s
I hardly see how this would be viable seeing as both mains overlook the gold expo
|
On April 24 2010 02:25 BentoBox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 17:04 Tsagacity wrote: It was just brought to my attention that on incineration zone it takes about 10-15 seconds for terran to lift to the gold minerals :s I hardly see how this would be viable seeing as both mains overlook the gold expo
Unless he rushes for the building armor/building range and goes for a quick PF. That's the only way I see Terran taking the gold expo quickly and securely.
|
EU still didn't get patch but I am watching some stream where guy plays that new map for 1v1 ladder. Looks kick-ass, hopefully it's balanced as much as it looks cool.
|
On April 23 2010 15:52 Mnijykmirl wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 15:47 LUE.Leoj wrote: Haven't gotten to play Incineration yet but it definitely looks like a fun/interesting fight over the gold expansion. Terran could definitely lock down quite a bit of the area with tanks. Ha, the gold expansion is more like a big "If I'm taking this you should just quit already" zone.
Exactly... I'm just unsure why whoever has been working on maps at Blizzard thinks that backdoors, short-as-hell rush times, and unreasonable expansions are good ideas. I mean, there's literally no purpose to either the gold expansion or the between-bases expansion, since if you're able to take them, you've already won.
Assuming you can even reliably pass the 1-base phase on this map, the naturals yet again are open from multiple sides and encourage cliff harass. Ironically, the low ground becomes important because of the failure to make high ground worth anything other than a minor annoyance. This means you want to 'take' the gold expansion, but in a close game you'll never be able to afford to spend resources on expanding there because you'll be punished immediately for doing so.
|
I'm seeing a lot of complaining in this thread, but no high-level replays.
|
there's something about this map that i like a lot, but i cant quite put my finger on it
|
On April 24 2010 03:16 BDF92 wrote: there's something about this map that i like a lot, but i cant quite put my finger on it maybe all the cliff for abuse tank or reaper ?
or the so funny short run distance as back door where 8 rax will pwn ?
|
I think blizzard has a competition going on to create the tiniest possible maps that are still borderline playable. oO
|
On April 24 2010 03:38 LaNague wrote: I think blizzard has a competition going on to create the tiniest possible maps that are still borderline playable. oO
It seems to me like they are focusing on the short games and putting as much action into these games as possible. Like trying to make the maps action dense vs size.
But ya I like zerg most and this map makes me sad.
|
Why would anyone want a long match if you can beat the guy in less than 10min? The whiners either don't like winning or are playing for fun (should not be complaining then).
|
The maps are the worst.
It is so stupid that every 2v2 map description says that it is all about teamplay, when in reality by having the ally nearby all the game loses every teamplay aspect, because you no longer can figure out a timing and double one of your opponents because the other guys base is 5 feet away. All of those maps will turn out to be those macro shitfests like twilight fortress, where one guy walls and the other guy just goes like 15 nexus or CC or whatever. Has nothing to do with 2v2 at all.
Blizz should keep the maps simple like Metalopolis, LT or Steppes.
|
On April 24 2010 03:12 ComradeDover wrote: I'm seeing a lot of complaining in this thread, but no high-level replays.
Seeing more complaing, but still not seeing replays.
|
On April 24 2010 04:39 Holden Caulfield wrote: Why would anyone want a long match if you can beat the guy in less than 10min? The whiners either don't like winning or are playing for fun (should not be complaining then).
Because longer games are about figuring out timings and standart builds that deflect agression with minimal effort while short games are more about cheese(either you are dead or you opponen after it). SC may appear to be all about clicking for people not familiar with it, but especially with the larger maps what i described above is important and people want that in Sc2 as well.
|
Protoss are whining, terrans are happy, zerg's can't bother. What about giving these maps a try, than evalute and let Blizzard know what you like and dislike. Stop fucking crying about everything, this is beta for fuck sake. You have a problem? > SCII Feedback forums are the way to go. Unless you whine simultaneously on both...
|
On April 24 2010 05:23 araged wrote: Protoss are whining, terrans are happy, zerg's can't bother. What about giving these maps a try, than evalute and let Blizzard know what you like and dislike. Stop fucking crying about everything, this is beta for fuck sake. You have a problem? > SCII Feedback forums are the way to go. Unless you whine simultaneously on both...
Please. The feedback forums aren't for "WAHH THIS MAP SUX NERF MARAUDERZ!!1!". Don't waste Blizzard's time with this nonsense. Eventually the complainers will have to just learn to play the game they're presented with or get the fuck out.
|
This map is REALLY small.
|
New 1v1 map is really nice-looking but the backdoor is just enormous and ridiculous. Map is pretty darn small too.
|
On April 24 2010 05:19 LaNague wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2010 04:39 Holden Caulfield wrote: Why would anyone want a long match if you can beat the guy in less than 10min? The whiners either don't like winning or are playing for fun (should not be complaining then). Because longer games are about figuring out timings and standart builds that deflect agression with minimal effort while short games are more about cheese(either you are dead or you opponen after it). SC may appear to be all about clicking for people not familiar with it, but especially with the larger maps what i described above is important and people want that in Sc2 as well.
But why bother? YOu should do the best thing to win and thats it. If that is the so called "cheese" everyone seem to whine about, what's the problem?. People around here seem to have something against winning...
|
On April 24 2010 05:44 Holden Caulfield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2010 05:19 LaNague wrote:On April 24 2010 04:39 Holden Caulfield wrote: Why would anyone want a long match if you can beat the guy in less than 10min? The whiners either don't like winning or are playing for fun (should not be complaining then). Because longer games are about figuring out timings and standart builds that deflect agression with minimal effort while short games are more about cheese(either you are dead or you opponen after it). SC may appear to be all about clicking for people not familiar with it, but especially with the larger maps what i described above is important and people want that in Sc2 as well. But why bother? YOu should do the best thing to win and thats it. If that is the so called "cheese" everyone seem to whine about, what's the problem?. People around here seem to have something against winning...
The reason why it's a problem is like the most simple aspect of competition ever - making sure the better player wins. If it's incredibly easy to do the strongest strategies, then it's not a very good competitive game. When the maps that come out are rewarding the same easy to pull off difficult to counter strategies (which is what small maps with exploitable terrain do by default), we have a problem. And no, it doesn't take a hundred games to note such rudimentary flaws.
|
On April 24 2010 05:44 Holden Caulfield wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2010 05:19 LaNague wrote:On April 24 2010 04:39 Holden Caulfield wrote: Why would anyone want a long match if you can beat the guy in less than 10min? The whiners either don't like winning or are playing for fun (should not be complaining then). Because longer games are about figuring out timings and standart builds that deflect agression with minimal effort while short games are more about cheese(either you are dead or you opponen after it). SC may appear to be all about clicking for people not familiar with it, but especially with the larger maps what i described above is important and people want that in Sc2 as well. But why bother? YOu should do the best thing to win and thats it. If that is the so called "cheese" everyone seem to whine about, what's the problem?. People around here seem to have something against winning...
If you manage to win consistently (also in best-of series) with cheese, then you are golden. The problem is, you most likely won't be able to.
|
|
|
|