EPTI looked at arid waste for a few secs before the server went down but its design seem to have been a lot more influenced by BW style maps.
Anyways, what are your thoughts on the new maps?
Your opinions on the new maps?
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
I looked at arid waste for a few secs before the server went down but its design seem to have been a lot more influenced by BW style maps. Anyways, what are your thoughts on the new maps? | ||
|
Ftrunkz
Australia2474 Posts
| ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
RatherGood
Canada147 Posts
| ||
|
seRapH
United States9756 Posts
| ||
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
Here's one. Both bases have a backdoor leading to the other's base thats protected by rocks. | ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
seRapH
United States9756 Posts
which expo is gold? the center one or the far one? or both? the single watchtower is going to be so important in TvT >:D | ||
|
FryKt
Norway27 Posts
| ||
|
deth
Australia1757 Posts
edit: to the guy above me, LT, Metalopolis, desert oasis and Steppes of war dont have back doors, honestly they need to have variety in their design to figure out balance and sort out what maps are the best and most fun to play on. | ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
FryKt
Norway27 Posts
 look at the space in your main. and btw dethrawr, almost everymap we have atm is proxy maps too small. | ||
|
TieN.nS)
United States2131 Posts
| ||
|
FryKt
Norway27 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:00 nitdkim wrote: makes me feel like they are deliberately trying to create maps where newbs could feel like they're having fun with all-in rushes that makes last less than 12 minutes each this | ||
|
Attica
United States277 Posts
On April 23 2010 11:59 FryKt wrote: I just wonder, can they make one fucking map without backdoors? ONLY ONE? it was a good idea but not on every fucking map, let us macro some more, and get too lategame. and bigger maps, 3p and 4p maps. Only map with a backdoor right now was blistering sands. And I guess Kulas Ravine if you want to count double rocks as a backdoor. | ||
|
Al Bundy
7257 Posts
The linked backdoor can lead to interesting micro. Overall it seems like reapers and Terran players, as well as players using cheesy tactics could have an advantage but I would like to wait & see what is the outcome in the long run, and more importantly I would love to see some ZvZ action on this map | ||
|
asdfTT123
United States989 Posts
| ||
|
EZjijy
United States1039 Posts
| ||
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/25/screenshot007su.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/8784/screenshot006nz.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4144/screenshot005upw.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6388/screenshot004dy.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/431/screenshot003nf.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/1341/screenshot002kd.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/7458/screenshot001iw.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/4152/screenshot008nr.jpg) @Frykt: I think the lack of space is compensated by the fact that you can pretty easily secure your natural and third. You have enough space below and above the CC to build your raxes and whatnot. | ||
|
Darpinion
United States210 Posts
| ||
|
FryKt
Norway27 Posts
why cant we have a map besides lost temple.Kilas ravine is just ass. There is 10 xel naga (omg) you connect in the middle, by all the xel nagas. the choke is a 2 choker. and there is backdoor in main AAAAAND at natural. It's like they put all the shit they made up and threw it in that map. The map is a total joke. | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
| ||
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/4158/screenshot010el.jpg I'll go play around in the other maps now :D | ||
|
iamtenninja
United States162 Posts
| ||
|
Kurt_Russell
Canada147 Posts
I know it's easier said than done, but we must cope with these styles of play and counter them. When people start losing to often even when doing their cheese, I'm sure they just give it up and try some other cheese that's just as well known. I do however think that 6 rax reaper will be nasty on incineration zone though, haven't been able to check it's cliff composition atm. | ||
|
FryKt
Norway27 Posts
On April 23 2010 11:59 dethrawr wrote: That map looks like proxy heaven ;_; edit: to the guy above me, LT, Metalopolis, desert oasis and Steppes of war dont have back doors, honestly they need to have variety in their design to figure out balance and sort out what maps are the best and most fun to play on. I didn't actually mean just backdoors, but that combined with very short rush distances. Steppes of war is soooo close. | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
| ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:13 Kurt_Russell wrote: I think that there are cool tools that exist against these all-in builds. I think that they're called scouting and reacting accordingly. If you see 1-base zerg in TvZ, chances are he's going all-in lings or baneling bust which both get murdered by production building walls. Scout their base early, see if any buildings/workers are missing/early/late, if so, get suspicious as hell. Sure it'll get you the first or first few times, afterwards you'll be used to it and it'll probably never work again. I know it's easier said than done, but we must cope with these styles of play and counter them. When people start losing to often even when doing their cheese, I'm sure they just give it up and try some other cheese that's just as well known. I do however think that 6 rax reaper will be nasty on incineration zone though, haven't been able to check it's cliff composition atm. The problem is that if maps consistently promote cheesy style play then we will consistently be seeing it a lot more instead of longer, more skill based (yes I think that playing a straight up standard game requires more skill then cheese) games. Small maps in general promote shorter games and longer games that use more tech and units generally produce more epic games which is we, the players and the viewers would want. | ||
|
OHtRUe
United States283 Posts
| ||
|
G4MR
United States371 Posts
| ||
|
G3nXsiS
United States656 Posts
| ||
|
Toburk
Canada7 Posts
| ||
|
Alou
United States3748 Posts
| ||
|
MementoMori
Canada419 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:00 TieN.nS) wrote: I'm not sure what's worse about Incineration, the layout or how straining it is on the eyes. I absolutely agree. I don't know about other graphics settings, but on low the creep almost blends in to the ground. I have to strain just to see where my creep ends.. | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
lim1017
Canada1278 Posts
| ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:07 BentoBox wrote: All incineration pics: + Show Spoiler + @Frykt: I think the lack of space is compensated by the fact that you can pretty easily secure your natural and third. You have enough space below and above the CC to build your raxes and whatnot. I fixed your images for you. | ||
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
| ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
| ||
|
Ebert
Canada24 Posts
| ||
|
fly.stat
United States449 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:09 Tsagacity wrote: Took one look at Incineration and knew I hated it. That map is insanely small and the opposing nats are about 10 seconds apart. Yep, and super cool backdoors into your main that stalkers can blink past. | ||
|
Inschato
Canada1349 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/1589/decena.png) ![[image loading]](http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9969/coalition.png) ![[image loading]](http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2874/aridwastes.png) ![[image loading]](http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/1559/scorchedhaven.png) | ||
|
fatduck
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
Disarray
United States1164 Posts
| ||
|
TieN.nS)
United States2131 Posts
And yeah, Incineration Zone is ass. | ||
|
mind1337
France107 Posts
Tanks are gonna have fun times on this map... If the games ever take longer than 10 mins to end haha | ||
|
Khalleb
Canada1909 Posts
 | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 23 2010 14:32 KhAlleB wrote: fast reaper will pwn so badly on this map, will be very hard to deal with i think the run distance is even shorter than step of war Fast reaper only pwns the unprepared. | ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
omninmo
2349 Posts
| ||
|
Mnijykmirl
United States299 Posts
| ||
|
KinosJourney2
Sweden1811 Posts
Decena seemed to be the best of them IMO. | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
What I wouldn't kill for a larger map size holy god. | ||
|
silencefc
United States875 Posts
| ||
|
Tinithor
United States1552 Posts
| ||
|
Wintermute
United States427 Posts
On April 23 2010 12:19 Tsagacity wrote: Oh by the way, "backdoor" is censored by the mature language filter. LOL I found out that "master" is also censored. P.S.-- Incineration is reaper/siege tank heaven. Ledges overlooking ledges overlooking everything on the map. The only positive for zerg is that you can perch overlords over most of the map and they need air to take them down. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
As for Incineration Zone, that is possibly the worst-designed, most imbalanced map I've ever seen. I don't know how zerg will win a ZvP there with a backdoor that makes Blistering Sands look sensible. It's also impossible to FE in TvP there, so I have a feeling that's going to ALSO be imbalanced for protoss. Honestly, it'd be an okay map if there just wasn't this freaking retard-mode backdoor. I'm so freaking sick of seeing them. They are horrible for high level play and completely garbage when it comes to balance. | ||
|
space_yes
United States548 Posts
I don't always like how these change the game dynamic. On a 4p 1v1 map start locs (cross, adjacent) and the positioning of your respective main forces add particular strategic considerations to the game. Sometimes these are there in shared base type maps, but more or less your forces are always together in the most defensible forward position. Using 4p 1v1 maps for 2v2 play you sometimes have separate 1v1 engagements going on. Additionally, if you consider early aggression and base trades for a 2v2 on a 4p 1v1 map it can often go something like this: 2v2 -> 2v1 -> 1v1. There is sometimes also the possibility of a player making a comeback and the game changing again to a 2v1 or 2v2. On a shared base map, you effectively have one big base and that's it. The game is more likely to go 2v2 -> one team kills the other. I'll have to play the new maps to see what I think. Regarding Floophead's comment I don't have any problems with 2v1 cheese. | ||
|
Leoj
United States396 Posts
| ||
|
Mnijykmirl
United States299 Posts
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. | ||
|
ostra
Brazil12 Posts
| ||
|
TurboT
Germany33 Posts
As for Incineration Zone, that is possibly the worst-designed, most imbalanced map I've ever seen. I don't know how zerg will win a ZvP there with a backdoor that makes Blistering Sands look sensible. It's also impossible to FE in TvP there, so I have a feeling that's going to ALSO be imbalanced for protoss. Honestly, it'd be an okay map if there just wasn't this freaking retard-mode backdoor. I'm so freaking sick of seeing them. They are horrible for high level play and completely garbage when it comes to balance. I guess adding maps like Incineration Zone is just another way to force Zergs to not play Roach/Hydra AND to buff mechplay and especially tanks. I haven't played it yet since the Eu Server has not been patched yet but "Lavaledge" (as i will speak of Inc.Zone from now on) begs for Mutalisks and ovidrops imo. | ||
|
Yokoblue
Canada594 Posts
Beside i played all the maps... and the new 1v1 map is... soso- i would say 2.5 stars out of 5 and is a tank fest + Coalition and Decena are really good  | ||
|
Deleted User 55994
949 Posts
On April 23 2010 11:59 dethrawr wrote: That map looks like proxy heaven ;_; edit: to the guy above me, LT, Metalopolis, desert oasis and Steppes of war dont have back doors, honestly they need to have variety in their design to figure out balance and sort out what maps are the best and most fun to play on. Metalopolis, Desert Oasis and Steppes all nat backdoors (Steppes one is covered by rocks). Blizzard LOVES backdoors way too much and doesn't seem to understand the importance of having a nat & a main with a single choke. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Tinithor
United States1552 Posts
On April 23 2010 16:03 faction123 wrote: Metalopolis, Desert Oasis and Steppes all nat backdoors (Steppes one is covered by rocks). Blizzard LOVES backdoors way too much and doesn't seem to understand the importance of having a nat & a main with a single choke. Metalopolis does NOT have a nat backdoor and neither does steppes, they are just a bit wider than the new style of BW map. | ||
|
RumZ
United States956 Posts
| ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
| ||
|
Ironclown
United States73 Posts
Though, the paths can be a little confusing, and if you play against Terran mech you will prob lose. BTW I went Carriers/HTemplar PVP it was amazing. | ||
|
EximoSua2
United States216 Posts
On April 23 2010 11:52 nitdkim wrote: makes me wonder if the maps are created by same people that made wc3 maps. You mean Blizzard entertainment? Yeah I think this game's by the same guys. | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On a completely related note; I hate it. | ||
|
Megaman703
Canada688 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 55994
949 Posts
On April 23 2010 16:05 Tinithor wrote: Metalopolis does NOT have a nat backdoor and neither does steppes, they are just a bit wider than the new style of BW map. yea... other than the passage from the 3rd into the nat of metalopolis and the destructible rocks at your 3rd on steppes, there's no backdoor? | ||
|
vicml21
Canada165 Posts
I like all the backdoors and different paths, but I don't really like how some of the maps dont give you a whole lot of space to have a decent micro battle with your opponent. As a Zerg, when I use my forces, I usually try to surround the enemy (esp with lings), but when my hydras and zerglings cant even fit down some of the paths, makes it a little harder to play on. Since I usually have a decent number of units moving at once (if I don't go mutas), and I dont like having to line up the units to get through, it puts me at a disadvantage vs stronger units. The main one I'm thinking of at the moment is incineration zone and the other 2v2 lava map. Compared to some of the maps being used in the MSL right now, huge difference in terms of how much I enjoy the map due to the large areas, and less space for stupid cheese tactics (Im thinking cannon - even if they usually dont work on me). Does anyone else feel similarly towards some of these new maps? | ||
|
smore
United States156 Posts
TvP both people 1 base immortal/1 base mass marauder backdoor push and whoever wins the first battle wins cause the rush distance is so short TvT is the same but its just mass marauder v mass marauder...break the backdoor and rush the secured nat/3rd base dont do much when the game doesnt last longer than 10 min and you get punished for trying to expand because the other player with just stay on 1 base and have more units than you | ||
|
Tinithor
United States1552 Posts
On April 23 2010 16:54 faction123 wrote: yea... other than the passage from the 3rd into the nat of metalopolis and the destructible rocks at your 3rd on steppes, there's no backdoor? Those are far enough from your nat that its not even a backdoor, stop complaining. | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
| ||
|
Simple
United States801 Posts
although they should really implement a feature where certain player colors are disabled on certain tilesets. remove red from magma maps, etc | ||
|
mynameisbean
Australia82 Posts
And yeah, I wouldn't mind watching PvP matchups on this one. | ||
|
Sitizen
United States34 Posts
| ||
|
BentoBox
Canada303 Posts
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 | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 24 2010 02:25 BentoBox wrote: 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. | ||
|
whiterabbit
2675 Posts
| ||
|
QibingZero
2611 Posts
On April 23 2010 15:52 Mnijykmirl wrote: 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. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
| ||
|
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
| ||
|
Khalleb
Canada1909 Posts
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 ? | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
| ||
|
MatDiF
1 Post
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. | ||
|
Holden Caulfield
102 Posts
| ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
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. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
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. | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
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. | ||
|
araged
Czech Republic189 Posts
| ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
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. | ||
|
majikmaynayZ
United States1 Post
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
| ||
|
Holden Caulfield
102 Posts
On April 24 2010 05:19 LaNague wrote: 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... | ||
|
QibingZero
2611 Posts
On April 24 2010 05:44 Holden Caulfield wrote: 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. | ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On April 24 2010 05:44 Holden Caulfield wrote: 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. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:01 QibingZero wrote: 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. StarCraft is just like that. If the better player always won every time without exception, Flash would never lose. The ability to do something the other player may not be prepared for is what helps keep the game fresh. | ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:03 ComradeDover wrote: StarCraft is just like that. If the better player always won every time without exception, Flash would never lose. The ability to do something the other player may not be prepared for is what helps keep the game fresh. This happens because, as Tossgirl once said "the differencies among progamers are slices of paper". No matter how awesome your strategy might be, if you are just an average yellow rank Joe on Iccup, you will never win against Flash. | ||
|
QibingZero
2611 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:03 ComradeDover wrote: StarCraft is just like that. If the better player always won every time without exception, Flash would never lose. The ability to do something the other player may not be prepared for is what helps keep the game fresh. You're vastly overestimating the difference between Flash and other top progamers. He wins as much as you could expect of the 'best' player at any given time. Besides, player dominance in such a highly competitive environment like the Korean BW scene is a good thing. But in any case, you didn't really address the point. If we're just going to go based off BW, maps like these would simply be anathema to begin with. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:32 Slunk wrote: This happens because, as Tossgirl once said "the differencies among progamers are slices of paper". No matter how awesome your strategy might be, if you are just an average yellow rank Joe on Iccup, you will never win against Flash. There've been several Korean TV shows that feature average battle.net tards occasionally winning against progamers. The better player -usually- wins, but StarCraft is, to some extent, an unpredictable child. Anything can happen, and upsets often do happen. On April 24 2010 06:42 QibingZero wrote: But in any case, you didn't really address the point. If we're just going to go based off BW, maps like these would simply be anathema to begin with. Why? | ||
|
HubertFelix
France631 Posts
 | ||
|
RonNation
United States385 Posts
cooooooooool | ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
I want waay larger maps for 1v1s, these force you to go 1 controlgroup, splitting up your army is insta dead atm. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:50 ZaaaaaM wrote: Too small! I want waay larger maps for 1v1s, these force you to go 1 controlgroup, splitting up your army is insta dead atm.Not true. I always use, at the very least, two control groups, on any map in almost any matchup. | ||
|
Holden Caulfield
102 Posts
On April 24 2010 06:01 QibingZero wrote: 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. But I'm not talking about the state of the game. Its just that people seem to want to have fun, to have a good game AND to win at the same time. Just because player A win with cheese or do the same thing over and over again and player B loses trying to play a nice game, with nonstop action and such, doenst make player A worse. Player A is just doing what's necessary to win. There is nothing wrong with a map that rewards fast rushes, all in, cheese or whatever strategies. There is nothing wrong with map that dictates how the match will be played. If the maps were randomly generated and one side is better than the other, then I would agree, but the maps are all mirrored, nobody gets a map advantage. It all comes do to the races then, and that's another story. | ||
|
Kurt_Russell
Canada147 Posts
Oh, and replays please. I just see blind theory-crafting here. People are complaning left and right "there's no micro", "there's no harrass", "there's no macro" and other such bull. Continue playing the game, it's been out for almost two months, no? I've seen tons of macro games on a bunch of different maps. Sure, not much tier 3 for the moment, it's just that players haven't really found much reason to go there for the moment cause most players try to follow the current MU trends. Play on, new viable strategies will develop. Sure, this map will promote early aggression, but doesn't that count as harrass and micro? Why would early aggression while macroing not take any skill? I feel big part of the QQ about this map is directly due to the 10-ling cheese attack cause of the last patch. That will go away, the game lasts like 2-3 minutes long, play another game and don't care: it's only stats. | ||
|
xBillehx
United States1289 Posts
As for the 2v2's I've played a few games on them only, but the desert twilight fortress like macro map has an awesome spot to hide tech that's doubtful to be scouted. I also think it's rather weird that theres a map where only one member has a back door. Kinda puts pressure on that one player. All in all I hate the new 1v1 map but the 2v2 ones are okay. I do miss Metropolis though. | ||
| ||
