| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:06 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Not that, he followed up a couple days later saying the current map pool "is not a level playing field" or something to that degree. Yeah I remember it. Having trouble finding it though. Still looking. | ||
|
TheRabidDeer
United States3806 Posts
On October 07 2010 16:39 kojinshugi wrote: It doesn't because I scout my main. I don't wall against toss if he's not going proxy 2 gate. It's impossible to beat a 6 pool without walling. You'll have one marine out at best unless you go some retarded super early rax build. Seriously, people complaining that zerg can't wall and terran and toss can should quit playing. It's absolutely pants-on-head retarded. If it is impossible to beat a 6 pool without walling why does ZvZ not consist of everybody 6 pooling each other? | ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
On October 07 2010 16:53 shannn wrote: Are you serious or is my sarcasm radar telling me you're just being sarcastic? If 6pooling was unbeatable without walling off why do most pro gamers not wall off all the time against zerg? It's because they build their buildings tight to their mineral lines thus making an effective wall-off unlike wall-off at ramp. This wall-off will have more advantages than walling off at ramp. Sorry, I live on planet Earth and not Magical Pixie Land where terrans don't wall off against Z. And 6 lings vs your 12-14 probes = easy win for probes and with micro no losses too. I'm not toss, and if you think pulling probes off to have an intense micro battle with lings isn't a loss then you're kind of a moron. This goes the same as with Terran. Terran probably has it even easier with bunkers. Okay, so you don't know what you're talking about, you just "probably think it's easier with bunkers". This sig tells me why you're having a lot of troubles with 6pool cheese. You probably haven't experienced how to stop 6pool and other cheeses effectively yet (or your macro isn't decent enough). ![[image loading]](http://sc2sig.com/s/eu/834596-1.png) Just putting spoiler tags around it doesn't make you less of a douchebag. My macro is fine, and I don't lose to cheeses. Because I fucking wall off against zerg, like every other Terran. Lings arrive at close positions around 2:45. If I start my rax at 12 it'll be done at 3:02, and the rine will be done at 3:27. That's around 40 seconds (game time) of six lings vs 14 SCVs. I can't start a bunker until 3:02, and it won't be done until 3:37. And sorry, but nearly a full minute later there will be more than six lings there. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
Yes. Tank lines and proper surrounding/flanking becomes possible again, among other things. Flanking only requires the existence of alternative paths to flank, and the space to do so. It isn't intrinsic to open spaces. For instance, you can easily flank in Metapolis, though there are no truly open spaces except the area outside of your main, and even then, it isn't comparable to the open space found in many ICCUP maps (In which the open space basically covers the entire map outside of your expo in some occasions), and the same applies to tank lines. Obviously, open space is a very easy way of encourage them, but it isn't the only way. I say this because your second point, may not be something we necessarily want to encourage in SC2. Zerg most substantially benefits from surrounds, but only once they have a extremely large army, while terran is hurt the most. Z Zerg doesn't need a nerf lategame. Terran already has the biggest disadvantage in SC2 right now once you hit 200/200 lategame, with both the slowest production facilities and a weaker 200/200 army. By using open space to the extent you sometimes do, you discourage positional play, the last strategic option Terran really is able to utilize as he the game progresses later and later. Obviously, T is not underpowered. Probably the opposite, but only at the end results. T suffers from poor lategame offset by overpowered earlygame. Your maps should be designed to help the other races early game and mid gain, but still allow terran to utilize the terrain to its advantage lategame. | ||
|
Sylvr
United States524 Posts
This is the post you're looking for. When you wanna find a Blue Post, go into one of the stickies and look for the Blue Poster of your choice. Once you've found one of their posts, there is a pull-down menu next to their name and one of the options is "View Posts". From there, you can skim over everything they've posted. | ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:11 TheRabidDeer wrote: If it is impossible to beat a 6 pool without walling why does ZvZ not consist of everybody 6 pooling each other? Are you seriously saying what you're saying? | ||
|
shannn
Netherlands2891 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:12 kojinshugi wrote: Sorry, I live on planet Earth and not Magical Pixie Land where terrans don't wall off against Z. I'm not toss, and Okay, so you don't know what you're talking about, you just "probably think it's easier with bunkers". Just putting spoiler tags around it doesn't make you less of a douchebag. My macro is fine, and I don't lose to cheeses. Because I fucking wall off against zerg, like every other Terran. Lings arrive at close positions around 2:45. If I start my rax at 12 it'll be done at 3:02, and the rine will be done at 3:27. That's around 40 seconds (game time) of six lings vs 14 SCVs. I can't start a bunker until 3:02, and it won't be done until 3:37. And sorry, but nearly a full minute later there will be more than six lings there. I'm gonna quote someone else just to reply to this trolling post of yours. On October 07 2010 17:03 QuothTheRaven wrote: Cool vs. IntoTheRainbow (aka HopeTorture), game 1 of GSL grand finals. IntoTheRainbow opts to put his barracks right next to his command center, vs. an opponent who is known for going 6pool (he 6pooled InCa in the Ro8), in the opening set of a match that's worth over $50,000. I'm sure he was confident that he could hold off the 6pool. Cool vs IntoTheRainbow, game 2 of GSL finals, he also does the same thing: rax next to his CC. Later lifts the rax and builds a factory to make a walloff much later in the game. This clearly already contradicts your entire statement. Not every Terran wall offs in the beginning. And not walling off against someone who actually 6pools in important matches is even more baller or are you saying that ITR is a noob compared to you because then we should all listen to you and all of your posts regarding Terran. On October 07 2010 17:14 kojinshugi wrote: Are you seriously saying what you're saying? Are you seriously saying that you know better than ITR who does not wall off in the beginning? If it was impossible to beat 6pool why don't you see every zerg 6pool vs Terran in pro games where half don't wall off?!!!?!?! Especially in a bo3 or more. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:14 Sylvr wrote: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/628240320?page=4#61 This is the post you're looking for. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/628240320?page=4#72 I do not win today  | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
How the fuck is a standard macro map with no gimmicks more complicated than a map with many destructible rocks and options for cliff harrass? You're doing it completely backwards. One thing I really like about Shakuras Plateau is that the natural is super easy to defend. What I don't understand though is why the hell are the vertical rush distances only like 8 seconds??? I kinda like Jungle Basin as well, easy to defend natural with pretty long rush distances. The third base is going to be a bit problematic, though. Am I the only person who likes the direction in which they're going with these maps? At least two-base play is going to be much stronger. They're not perfect by any means but an improvement at least. | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:01 Half wrote: This guy is clearly an idiot, but I think he brings up a few important points of discussion. Do the large, open, spaces of BW have a place in SC2 now that units cluster so much easier? And on a more broader note, are the current custom maps out there a little bit to disparate from Blizzards "style" of melee maps? Some employ tools which blizzard has been hesitant in using (bump mapping build-able terrain), others feel very thematically separate from the aesthetic style of blizzard maps (Emphasis on Aesthetic simplicity) Yeah I'm an idiot for bringing legitimate criticism and analysis to Iccup maps instead of blindly accepting them like sheep. Only Iccup supporters are allowed to write in an angry rant style apparently. Clearly Iccup maps have no flaws, that's why there's so many "must watch" games on them. Basically I'm tired of this self serving Iccup crusade in the guise of 'bettering' the SC2 competitive scene, when really nothing has been shown clearly. I can't even think of a single GSL game that was 'ruined' by the maps. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:17 Ocedic wrote: Yeah I'm an idiot for bringing legitimate criticism and analysis to Iccup maps instead of blindly accepting them like sheep. Only Iccup supporters are allowed to write in an angry rant style apparently. LOL! THAT WAS YOU? Do you realize that 75% of our maps are original maps? Have you ever played Triforce? And yes we play, you should obviously know this. | ||
|
mOnion
United States5657 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:17 Ocedic wrote: Yeah I'm an idiot for bringing legitimate criticism and analysis to Iccup maps instead of blindly accepting them like sheep. Only Iccup supporters are allowed to write in an angry rant style apparently. 1) there are more original than BW maps that iccup has made 2) what do you mean "space that goes unused". that makes no sense 3) you seem to think of the idea of "BW skirmishes" as if BW was a game of nexus wars and we'd send our 12 units to attack each other in the center over and over until someone won 4) you criticize a very interesting map dynamic with no foundation no one's blindly accepting iccup maps, they got their reputation from the quality. your post was idiotic and you backed it with a lot of normative statements rather than important positive ones | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:19 iCCup.Diamond wrote: LOL! THAT WAS YOU? You realize that 75% of our maps are original maps? Have you ever played Triforce? And yes we play, you should obviously know this. With a 'CEO' talking like this how can you not love this organization? And actually no I didn't realize because I went by your October recommended maps, a good chunk of the non-Blizzard maps being BW remakes. | ||
|
mOnion
United States5657 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:23 Ocedic wrote: With a 'CEO' talking like this how can you not love this organization? And actually no I didn't realize because I went by your October recommended maps, a good chunk of the non-Blizzard maps being BW remakes. forum posting has no relevance to competency in organization T_T what is this... | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:17 Shikyo wrote: @Blizzard: How the fuck is a standard macro map with no gimmicks more complicated than a map with many destructible rocks and options for cliff harrass? You're doing it completely backwards. this learning sc2-maps was actually quite difficult for me (wc3-gamer) because they are VERY gimmicky; it's not just entry and exit points, ramps and stuff, but all the destructible debris and the LEDGES all over the place are not easy to learn at first; I think everybody can remember his first "wtf where does this frickin tank shoot from" experience on kulas straight up macro-maps would be better for newbs because they would be forced to learn mechanics and not just all-in every....every....game | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
The point of it is to get Blizzard to start working with the community in regards to maps. It's the one thing where we want to help and the one thing where we CAN help, and the fact that they're saying nothing is infuriating. Basically what they are doing is turning down a design team that they don't have to pay. It's stupid. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:23 Ocedic wrote: With a 'CEO' talking like this how can you not love this organization? And actually no I didn't realize because I went by your October recommended maps, a good chunk of the non-Blizzard maps being BW remakes. Cause I'm open and honest? You got me. Actually of the 8 maps that are non-Blizzard ones in the map pool 5 are original (63%). | ||
|
Darksoldierr
Hungary2013 Posts
| ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:24 mOnion wrote: forum posting has no relevance to competency in organization T_T what is this... I like how you ignore the point where I dismantle your "less BW than original" argument. Also, reading comprehension check: I didn't mention anything about competency. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On October 07 2010 17:25 Ocedic wrote: I like how you ignore the point where I dismantle your "less BW than original" argument. Also, reading comprehension check: I didn't mention anything about competency. Actually you got proven wrong. Read up a couple posts. Sorry. | ||
| ||
|
|
Patches Events
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Bonyth vs Dewalt
OSC
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Maestros of the Game
Classic vs Lambo
Clem vs Maru
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
!
