New ladder maps! - Page 11

On October 07 2010 10:24 Too_MuchZerg wrote:
I just don't get what Blizzard is thinking. Let me explain how ladder map changes has to be done.

Ladder has 9 maps with 3 veto. So how should new maps to be added to ladder? By changing/replacing 4-5 maps (always more than veto option) to force players to play those maps. Now players can easily veto new maps because they don't know/like maps.

Yet again I am referring WC3 ladder map pool changes, same thing happened. 1-2 maps was changed, everyone/most vetoed those maps because those were new maps. Same old maps were still played...

Of course I have faith that Blizzard won't make same mistakes again

edit: of course some high level players used to thumb down common maps they didn't like with adding new maps to their list. Trick was that other high level players didn't do that so you could play maps you like.

edit2: Still this way there will be some bad maps but more likely good maps too. Blizzard just looks data how many times certain maps are been vetoed and replaces those next time with new maps.

On October 07 2010 10:54 DTrain wrote:


They should do what iCCup did and give bonus points for maps of the week.
This gave people an incentive to learn the new maps.

On October 07 2010 10:51 faction123 wrote:


Crossfire is a map where the entire middle is 10 different chokepoints. Amazing if the community consensus is that it's actually a good map. People really like beating zerg don't they?

On October 07 2010 10:46 kontrol wrote:
I don't understand why everyone wants the map to be all the same? Must not be too small, easy natual, not too many cliff so terran cannot use tank too much, lots of place to fight so your never put in a corner... and list could go on. Each race we're given specific advantage and disadvantage (balance of this goes in another thread), but if a map expose more one of your race disadvantage or one of your opponent race advantage too far it's immediatly a nerf cry.

What I'd like to say is that I like that not every map are the same. Different build order (6 pool might be very popular on Shakuras so you can attack before wall in) different strategy in unit composition to get an advantage, different unit positioning...

You know the map, you know the flaws for your race and the advantage of your oponent, why not use this knowledge to your advantage and work on something that will get you a win?
The map is the same for your opponent also. Of course imbalance where your start base side cliff is longer than your opponent one so your colossi/reaper have harder time to come up than your opponent shouldn't exist.

I really like the iCCup maps, even if I'm not able to play them enough cause they arent popular, but I feel some of them just look the same with different position and different graphics and thus doesn't promote very different gameplay.

On October 07 2010 10:52 parkin wrote:
Why do they insist on making more blood bath maps?

Why do the think destructible rocks is such a baller feature to cover 50% of the maps with them?

Why do they make the maps asymmetrically imbalanced?

Sad to see that Blizzards map makers are so obviously clueless and incompetent...

If Blizzard/GSL have any respect for the game they would hire some KESPA and/or iCCup map makers.

On October 07 2010 10:39 Archerofaiur wrote:
Didnt just about everyone love the new version of DO?

On October 07 2010 11:12 Chronicle wrote:
Dunno if this has been mentioned yet but jungle basin might be better for Protoss than Desert Oasis was. Reason? You can warp in the safe expo from outside it without breaking the rocks, just like on DQ.