|
On September 26 2010 03:03 junkacc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2010 01:28 Bagi wrote:On September 25 2010 21:34 junkacc wrote:
Hardware limitations people, hardware limitations. Can't have maps like that and expect everyone to run it smoothly.
This whole 3D business is all hype anyway. You don't need 3D in RTS. How often do people take advantage of rotate and zoom. Tasteless and Artosis use it for LOLs occasionally but that's it. It's just there so Blizzard can say:
"Hey look! SC2 is in 3D! Give us your money NAO!"
Because of hardware limitations we are stuck with small maps and the 200 unit limit.
It's not even real 3D. It doesn't accurately portray how line-of-sight would be obscured by cliffs and whatnot. Nor does it take into account obstruction of hitscan (straight line) weapons vs lobbed weapons. They just put the same mechanic as BW... if it's on a cliff you automatically can't see it.
Nice you all fell for the marketing gimmick though. I think Dustin Browden would say: "3D is keeeeeewl!!!"
. Look at how smart this guy is. We're all so stupid for playing SC2. You got us there. Yeah, enjoy paying 180 bucks for the whole thing. Dustin Browden would say: "Money is keeeeeewl!!!"
OK, if you didn't buy, or don't intend to buy SC2, then why are you even here?
And I'm pretty sure a majority of people who are visiting this site, and have SC2 didn't buy it becuase it was 3d...
with that said, large maps are very playable, as is larger supply, even with 3d, proven simply because of the fact that I have played on them. therefore, "hardware limitations" is an illegitamate argument, and the rest of the points stated here have nothing to do with the topic.
|
On September 26 2010 03:13 Mr.Minionman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2010 03:03 junkacc wrote:On September 26 2010 01:28 Bagi wrote:On September 25 2010 21:34 junkacc wrote:
Hardware limitations people, hardware limitations. Can't have maps like that and expect everyone to run it smoothly.
This whole 3D business is all hype anyway. You don't need 3D in RTS. How often do people take advantage of rotate and zoom. Tasteless and Artosis use it for LOLs occasionally but that's it. It's just there so Blizzard can say:
"Hey look! SC2 is in 3D! Give us your money NAO!"
Because of hardware limitations we are stuck with small maps and the 200 unit limit.
It's not even real 3D. It doesn't accurately portray how line-of-sight would be obscured by cliffs and whatnot. Nor does it take into account obstruction of hitscan (straight line) weapons vs lobbed weapons. They just put the same mechanic as BW... if it's on a cliff you automatically can't see it.
Nice you all fell for the marketing gimmick though. I think Dustin Browden would say: "3D is keeeeeewl!!!"
. Look at how smart this guy is. We're all so stupid for playing SC2. You got us there. Yeah, enjoy paying 180 bucks for the whole thing. Dustin Browden would say: "Money is keeeeeewl!!!" OK, if you didn't buy, or don't intend to buy SC2, then why are you even here? And I'm pretty sure a majority of people who are visiting this site, and have SC2 didn't buy it becuase it was 3d... with that said, large maps are very playable, as is larger supply, even with 3d, proven simply because of the fact that I have played on them. therefore, "hardware limitations" is an illegitamate argument, and the rest of the points stated here have nothing to do with the topic.
I bought the game (shame on me I bought the hype too) and the standard maps only run with graphics mid-low. Not everyone has a great comp like you so just because it runs fine on your comp doesn't mean it runs on everyone's.
And does your comp run well on 4vs4 with 800 units on it? Don't think so.
|
Here is what blizzard should do.
Make Ladder seasons like Diablo 2.
Ladder resets bring about new maps into the rotation. For instance, 5 maps are played on this ladder. Out of the five maps, two are the least played. Scrap those two and bring two new maps to the rotation. After a few ladder seasons. Bring fresh new maps to the rotation.
Finally, maps should be a copy of Fighting spirit with a few tweaks to accomodate reapers and blinking stalkers.
From there, create maps which are different and much more variable. The reason terran is destroying right now is because of the million chokepoints on maps. Xel naga towers also create unneeded choke points.
Small ramps were an issue in BW, Terran and toss could defend key points with ease. With Python things started to change.
Bigger ramps, they need to be implemented.
|
I run everything on low because I favor performance over eye candy. And while I haven't actually played any 4v4's, I know that those maps are massive, therefore making such maps in 1v1 a definite possibility.
|
Has Bliz said anything about when they are going to switch up the map pool? Swapping Desert Oasis with a new map for example. Even if it's not a bad map nobody wants to play it...I would like to see some user maps in there personally.
A simple yes/no will suffice so I don't hijack this thread.
|
On September 25 2010 21:00 Tump wrote:
Crossfire would be in the right direction, but they really need some more solid maps.
They shoulda copied Fighting Spirit.
I can't believe it took this long for someone to mention fighting spirit or eye of the storm. IMO those are the way that sc2 maps need to go.
|
I feel like there are a lot of these threads and I think everyone agrees that larger/new maps would be ideal. They would also make balancing easier. I really think it's strange that all of their maps are small with one medium and zero large.
I really like the idea of adding more maps to the pool based on division. When a platinum player plays against a gold player, they could only draw a map from the 'gold' pool. This could end up causing problems with players not being able to ladder on maps they like.
The solution would be IMO to give each division the same map pool, but different amounts of vetos. Each division would then have a certain set of maps automatically vetoed. Players would be able to uncheck some and check others, etc.. This would allow all of the maps to be played at any division, but would still keep it friendly for casual/new players.
Granted not a perfect solution, but it's a thought in the right direction.
|
I absolutely LOVE the size of Lost Temple and without the major abuse on ledges this map would be my favorite map. When Terran's don't abuse these cliffs I have some of the best games ever. I really hope Blizzard starts adding better maps or talking with Korean map makers to come up with new designs. Honestly, with all the Customs out there I think Blizzard should be pumping out at least 2 maps per month for us in patches.
|
Yeah completely agree.
This is probably why toss is not having the same problems versus terran as zerg, because they have their own tricks to abusing and traversing terrain, like blink stalkers and using proxy pylons to warp in units on otherwise inaccessible terrain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
