| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Aldair
United States78 Posts
Poll: Do you play on iCCup maps? No (200) Yes (192) 392 total votes Your vote: Do you play on iCCup maps? How many people play them? I don't like the ladder maps but love the iCCup maps; so how many people actually play them? | ||
|
Nightfall.589
Canada766 Posts
| ||
|
monitor
United States2404 Posts
| ||
|
Aldair
United States78 Posts
| ||
|
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
| ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 01 2010 08:46 Tha_Docta wrote: I seriously love the ICCUP maps, wish they were on ladder /: Support them here if you want them in ladder and such. There is only so long Blizz can ignore that thread.... | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
| ||
|
Tears.Of.The.Moon
Slovenia715 Posts
I havent yet seen any tournament with these maps ( if there was any, i'm sorry). Curently it gives you no benefits playing these maps ( except having a fun custom game) and mastering them. If you are an average sc player like me , it's curently bether to practice on lader maps to increase your skills. | ||
|
SilverJohnny
United States885 Posts
| ||
|
Hakker
United States1360 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:09 PerfectTear wrote: I don't want to sound harsh, but i'm just wondeing what is the point of the iccup maps? I havent yet seen any tournament with these maps ( if there was any, i'm sorry). Curently it gives you no benefits playing these maps ( except having a fun custom game) and mastering them. If you are an average sc player like me , it's curently bether to practice on lader maps to increase your skills. Presumably they will get much more usage later on. The iccup team has already expressed that they have big things in the making for the future. | ||
|
limonovich
England226 Posts
| ||
|
MrMotionPicture
United States4327 Posts
| ||
|
TMTurtle
183 Posts
| ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:15 limonovich wrote: Why would blizzard allow integration of maps made by people who *essentially* allowed loads of people to pirate the multiplayer portion of brood war? You could also view it as the people that are the reason competitive BW existed outside of Korea lived on? Or the people who stepped in when they abandoned their own ladder, and refused to stop hacking/dropping/bm/etc? Also in all reality iCCup.com and iCCup TV are two totally separate entities, there is very little iCCup.com influence in iCCup TV and vice versa. On December 01 2010 09:12 Hakker wrote: Presumably they will get much more usage later on. The iccup team has already expressed that they have big things in the making for the future. VERY big things. | ||
|
MindRush
Romania916 Posts
On December 01 2010 08:46 Tha_Docta wrote: I seriously love the ICCUP maps, wish they were on ladder /: seriously, remove Blistering Sands and introduce Destination and Fighting Spirit I cannot understand why Blizzard hangs on to their shitty maps, some of them purely suck | ||
|
Chriamon
United States886 Posts
On December 01 2010 08:50 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Support them here if you want them in ladder and such. There is only so long Blizz can ignore that thread.... Didn't Blizz say they didn't want iccup maps b/c they are too big or something like that? Its like, we said "we want iccup maps, they are more macro based" and then blizz said "Naw, we dont want macro maps on ladder" | ||
|
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
On December 01 2010 08:50 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Support them here if you want them in ladder and such. There is only so long Blizz can ignore that thread.... Never on BNET forums so I never knew about that thread, just contributed to it though, hopefully it gets noticed, or more likely, no longer is ignored | ||
|
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:30 Chriamon wrote: Didn't Blizz say they didn't want iccup maps b/c they are too big or something like that? Its like, we said "we want iccup maps, they are more macro based" and then blizz said "Naw, we dont want macro maps on ladder" I think thats a little unfair, its not that they dont want macro maps, they just dont want purely macro maps. They want varied play, aggressive, technical, macro etc. I mean, I think metropolis is pretty macro right? | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:09 PerfectTear wrote: If you are an average sc player like me , it's curently bether to practice on lader maps to increase your skills. I disagree, I think for an average sc player like you and me it doesn't matter if we play Blizzard maps or iCCup maps or whatever, as long as the maps are fairly standard (nothing too crazy like 14 gold mineral patches in your main or big racial imbalance). It's good practice either way. But pro gamers obviously want to play on the maps that are used in the tournaments so they can figure out all the ways to abuse the maps  I try to play on iCCup maps as much as possible, I can't stand those Blizzard maps anymore. Not only because most of them suck, but also because I played them since beta and it just gets boring. Don't have any friend who is my skill level tho, so my games on iCCup maps generally suck lol | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:28 MindRush wrote: seriously, remove Blistering Sands and introduce Destination and Fighting Spirit I cannot understand why Blizzard hangs on to their shitty maps, some of them purely suck Destination is trash for SCII, and did not transition well. There are much better maps then that. Fighting Spirit is good but encourages a bit too much turtling. On December 01 2010 09:30 Chriamon wrote: Didn't Blizz say they didn't want iccup maps b/c they are too big or something like that? Its like, we said "we want iccup maps, they are more macro based" and then blizz said "Naw, we dont want macro maps on ladder" They said custom maps are "too complicated" and they wanted easy maps only. Whatever that means... | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10668 Posts
Unfortunatly I think this is one of Blizzard's goals with they're small maps. Even a considerably large map like shakuras plateau can have relatively rush short distances, where for instance in TvZ, I still think it's pretty risky to hatch before pool vs terran's who will send alot of SCVS, and just 2/3rax before orbital. So this limits the amount of game play options for each race. Although i'm just bassically trying to sum up the reason why I think they don't use ICCup / other Custom maps, the too complicated part comes from the fact that it would make gameplay more dynamic ( and alot more like BroodWar, if you've ever played these iCCup maps, it really gives you that awesome feeling playing on the map, really SO similar to BW) The reason I think all the SC2 maps could be considered "Easy" by them is because it's pretty simple to all in on these maps, while on the iCCup maps, you are going to have to try ALOT harder to succeed with some gimmicky all in build, Why? because I think these maps are more balanced. P.S. signing that thread on Bnet about custom maps you made Diamond, nice thread. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:51 GGzerG wrote: Diamond i'd like to state that I think I know what that means about custom maps like iCCup maps being " too complicated " ,or them wanting easy maps only. I remember in the beta of SC2 or maybe even before the beta, Blizzard talking about the maps, they said I believe in one of the battle reports that they designed the maps all 'smaller ' than in BroodWar because they want more fast paced games, they want games to not last to long, like on average I think they said a normal game would last 15-20 minutes. Unfortunatly I think this is one of Blizzard's goals with they're small maps. Even a considerably large map like shakuras plateau can have relatively rush short distances, where for instance in TvZ, I still think it's pretty risky to hatch before pool vs terran's who will send alot of SCVS, and just 2/3rax before orbital. So this limits the amount of game play options for each race. Although i'm just bassically trying to sum up the reason why I think they don't use ICCup / other Custom maps, the too complicated part comes from the fact that it would make gameplay more dynamic ( and alot more like BroodWar, if you've ever played these iCCup maps, it really gives you that awesome feeling playing on the map, really SO similar to BW) The reason I think all the SC2 maps could be considered "Easy" by them is because it's pretty simple to all in on these maps, while on the iCCup maps, you are going to have to try ALOT harder to succeed with some gimmicky all in build, Why? because I think these maps are more balanced. P.S. signing that thread on Bnet about custom maps you made Diamond, nice thread. This is very true but I think maybe they are having a HuK like tunnel vision when it comes to our maps. Not all of them are macro based BW remakes. Sungsu Crossing and Starlight Breaker are two maps in this months pool that are very small, same with Obsidian Inferno. We have a great vareity, so while excuses like that may have cut it before when our mappool was mainly very large macro maps, it does not hold water any more. Thank you for the support everyone! That thread is at 28 pages now with no blue response or a close (since I found out after I posted it that the name was against the rules), they have to break eventually. | ||
|
TehForce
1072 Posts
| ||
|
tmonet
United States172 Posts
| ||
|
fabiano
Brazil4644 Posts
Or they will just keep making fag maps by themselves and continue to screw us like they are doing rightnow. | ||
|
Niguana
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
imyzhang
Canada809 Posts
| ||
|
jamesr12
United States1549 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
RoboBob
United States798 Posts
| ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 01 2010 12:05 RoboBob wrote: I thought I read something around Blizzcon that they knew the maps were an issue, but they wanted to keep them as-is for balancing reasons. Which does kinda make sense, limiting variables will make balance analysis more accurate. And to be fair, they've done a good job thus far...imbalances haven't gone past 20% in pretty much any measure you choose. On the other hand, because maps themselves are an important element of balance, that can throw stuff out of whack. GSL3 is a great example, with a ton of zergs qualifing partly because of the Zerg-friendly map pool, and subsequently tanking in the actual season from getting anti-zerg maps. So you balance the game based on bad maps? Seems sort of counter intuitive to me.... | ||
|
GhostBusters
United States198 Posts
| ||
|
Proto_Protoss
United States495 Posts
| ||
|
IumSpechul
United States17 Posts
i'll voice my support for iccup maps. they are fantastic! | ||
|
Rokk
United States425 Posts
| ||
|
KnightOfNi
United States1508 Posts
 I'm still playing through a few of the iccup maps too so I might be missing some - although tbh the brood war ports are pretty much universally awful (including temple >.>), no offense. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
 | ||
|
SenorChang
Australia4729 Posts
| ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
| ||
|
Caphe
Vietnam10817 Posts
I guess you next big things is a map making company which contracted with Blizzard to make maps for ladder in SC2. If thats true, I'm so so so grateful :D. | ||
|
Bandino
United States342 Posts
| ||
|
MindRush
Romania916 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:36 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Destination is trash for SCII, and did not transition well. There are much better maps then that. Fighting Spirit is good but encourages a bit too much turtling. Destination is OK if you make the 2 narrow bridges exiting the natural into a wider central one. Fighting spirit is also OK, since turtling is really not an option on a 4 player map, with lots of expansions to take, especially if you play against a macroing zerg. | ||
|
TedJustice
Canada1324 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES50107 Posts
On December 01 2010 15:03 Bandino wrote: In all honesty I've found the ICCUP maps not only all relatively similar in play style, but kind of bland in comparison to Blizzard maps. Just the aesthetics of blizzard maps are amazing and i know while they might not directly impact the game play, it just makes the game experience that much more pleasant. Thats another problem with ladder maps because they get played so much you develop a play style that suits just these maps.If you play on the maps too much you can't even imagine trying out other new maps because they involve different strategies and tactics.If the game is to evolve we need custom maps. | ||
|
Mellotron
United States329 Posts
| ||
|
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES50107 Posts
On December 01 2010 23:08 Mellotron wrote: Are the iccup maps factually better or just different? Better because they are different.and the best part is that changes that need to be made to the map will be quicker and the map makers are given direct and quality feedback. | ||
|
Grebliv
Iceland800 Posts
Tournaments should apparently not be using them anyway according to them (not sure how that's supposed to happen when most of your practice time unless you're on a pro level is spent playing those maps). Tell that to iccup and as a worst case scenario at least the positional balance will be fixed, even if it is just to make the thor reach the hatch on all positions D: That is basically the difference. | ||
|
KULA_u
Switzerland107 Posts
| ||
|
Alou
United States3748 Posts
| ||
|
IrT4nkz
229 Posts
I'd like to play the iCCup maps but b/c of the way their custom map join system is made it makes it hard unless there are CHAT CHANNELS. I do hope most of the top players realize that Blizzard maps needs improvement and move onto custom maps like iCCup for a change. | ||
|
Makh
Canada143 Posts
For those of you who never checked out the thread for these maps, everytime someone comes out with a comment about the maps, they get jumped on by the map makers looking for more feedback. They are constantly trying to improve their own maps, and are very sensitive to what players are telling them. Also - someone mentioned aesthetics - Blizz maps *do* look a lot nicer than the new maps (with doodads all over), but that's only for now. Once these maps are properly tuned, you can bet there will be time for polishing for the sake of looks. | ||
|
TSM
Great Britain584 Posts
On December 01 2010 09:30 Chriamon wrote: Didn't Blizz say they didn't want iccup maps b/c they are too big or something like that? Its like, we said "we want iccup maps, they are more macro based" and then blizz said "Naw, we dont want macro maps on ladder" you are so right blizz is ecouraging cheese. I love iccup maps | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Talic_Zealot
688 Posts
. 60-70% of the ladder maps are a total disaster and should be erased from existence and hopefully in a year we won't remember them cause they are BAD. Others may become good with some adjustments. | ||
|
CursedFeanor
Canada539 Posts
On December 01 2010 08:50 iCCup.Diamond wrote: Support them here if you want them in ladder and such. There is only so long Blizz can ignore that thread.... left a post there as well... I hope Blizzard somehow acknowledges the problem and step up to our expectations. | ||
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
| ||
|
universalwill
United States654 Posts
i really feel as though blizzard should have a different pool for higher level players. the "small maps for the purpose of not frightening the new players" sort of reminds me of the No Child Left Behind act that is currently fucking over the American school systems by holding back the bright kids for the sake of the dumb ones. What is it with mankind's obsession with eliminating natural selection? It's for the good of the species. | ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
| ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
On December 02 2010 01:34 Barrin wrote: The biggest reason why some people don't play iCCup maps is because they're not yet used in major tournaments. Hmm, even if they were used in tournaments it would be really hard to play on them because of the popularity system. Only a handful of people would be playing on them, while the majority still plays on the ladder maps for customs. I really don't know what Blizzard was thinking... I guess chat channels will help to get some custom map organization going- really it's just a stupid situation. That said, having custom maps in large tournaments would definitely help to spread their popularity. | ||
|
BlasiuS
United States2405 Posts
Zerg needs open area to flank & surround, some maps don't permit that. Steppes and Delta Quad (non-cross position) forces you to pre-make defense, because you can't make crawlers as a reaction to seeing your opponent leave his nat. Bunkers and photon cannons can build fast enough, it's only zerg that has this problem, with spine crawlers having a 50s build time. Maps with too many chokes also put zerg at a major disadvantage, against both protoss & terran. Protoss only need to use a small # of force fields to completely block off the zerg army, or split it in half. Meanwhile it's impossible to beat tanks in chokes if you can't attack from another direction or surround. Why do you think Incineration Zone and Kulas Ravine were removed from the map pool? Too many chokes. Jungle Basin is a perfect example of a map with too many chokes and no open area. | ||
|
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
On December 02 2010 02:40 BlasiuS wrote: The problem with blizz focusing on small maps is that they force aggression, discourage static defense, and have disadvantages for zerg. Zerg needs open area to flank & surround, some maps don't permit that. Steppes and Delta Quad (non-cross position) forces you to pre-make defense, because you can't make crawlers as a reaction to seeing your opponent leave his nat. Bunkers and photon cannons can build fast enough, it's only zerg that has this problem, with spine crawlers having a 50s build time. Maps with too many chokes also put zerg at a major disadvantage, against both protoss & terran. Protoss only need to use a small # of force fields to completely block off the zerg army, or split it in half. Meanwhile it's impossible to beat tanks in chokes if you can't attack from another direction or surround. Why do you think Incineration Zone and Kulas Ravine were removed from the map pool? Too many chokes. Jungle Basin is a perfect example of a map with too many chokes and no open area. As a terran player, I get confused when I hear this about zerg, but only because Ive been seeing so much kyrix zenith type play on ladder which is of course, very aggressive and works quite well on small maps. Cant speak for zvp though. | ||
|
Parsimony
16 Posts
| ||
|
ZomgTossRush
United States1041 Posts
People are tricked into thinking that just because they were semi balanced or established in the proleague that they somehow are magically balanced in this completely different game. yes they are awesome and nostalgic, but i wouldn't even dare consider using most of them in competitive play. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 02 2010 04:24 ZomgTossRush wrote: Iccup maps are hugely overrated. People are tricked into thinking that just because they were semi balanced or established in the proleague that they somehow are magically balanced in this completely different game. yes they are awesome and nostalgic, but i wouldn't even dare consider using most of them in competitive play. You should look again at our maps. 20 or so are original maps, only 6 are remakes, and we rarely use them anymore at that. If your going to hate, make sure you have all the details. Remakes just gave us a starting point to figure things out. We haven't even done a remake in like two months now.... | ||
|
IamAnton
Canada335 Posts
that being said i still prefer the old iccup maps that were remade for sc2 as opposed to the new ones. I especially like the maps with the additions of gold minerals and xelnaga towers. | ||
|
KillerPlague
United States1386 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
SOOP
Classic vs GuMiho
Sparkling Tuna Cup
AllThingsProtoss
Fire Grow Cup
BSL: ProLeague
HBO vs Doodle
spx vs Tech
DragOn vs Hawk
Dewalt vs TerrOr
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
WardiTV Invitational
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
