EPT[D] Maps, too small? [replays, long] - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
aurum510
United States229 Posts
| ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
On December 26 2010 07:44 UniversalSnip wrote: Why? whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy? I seriously don't understand, how does blizzard benefit from the ladder maps being used in gsl? I don't either. Besides that: How could we player punish Blizzard for it? I mean, Blizz wants HotS to be bought and it is no big deal to let the community introduce map to the map pool. So what are they after? | ||
|
decaf
Austria1797 Posts
| ||
|
[Eternal]Phoenix
United States333 Posts
It's also not just a scouting issue, though that certainly plays a role. It's not just enough to know they're going to allin. You have to know exactly what the allin is, and you have to react 100% perfectly to defend it. The level of BO-luck and allin-dominance will not change dramatically with map size, though map size will help a lot in dealing with some specific rushes, reducing the guessing that needs to be done on defense. The problem is inherent in game design and is just going to take a lot more effort to fix than Blizzard wants to put forth. We literally won't see any change until HotS and only then if it's like Warcraft III ROC --> TFT. The game needs a massive overhaul. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 26 2010 07:53 MichaelJLowell wrote: What's your source on this? Know you're not making it up, just want confirmation. For what Junkka said, it's on the gomtv site on their forums, I'm pretty sure when there was that whole map rigging controversy (where Junkka explained the box he made). As for my other sources, well that's plain not public, but I never came out and said anything until Junkka did. | ||
|
MichaelJLowell
United States610 Posts
On December 26 2010 08:27 iCCup.Diamond wrote: For what Junkka said, it's on the gomtv site on their forums, I'm pretty sure when there was that whole map rigging controversy (where Junkka explained the box he made). As for my other sources, well that's plain not public, but I never came out and said anything until Junkka did. Alright, thanks for the heads-up. | ||
|
skindzer
Chile5114 Posts
On December 26 2010 08:27 iCCup.Diamond wrote: For what Junkka said, it's on the gomtv site on their forums, I'm pretty sure when there was that whole map rigging controversy (where Junkka explained the box he made). As for my other sources, well that's plain not public, but I never came out and said anything until Junkka did. Are 100% sure about this? I remember Blizz saying that they have no problem with tournaments being run with other maps and what the GOM people said is that they dont want to use other maps because they want GSL to be an open tournament where everyone has the same chances of getting in. (Ladder maps can be played by everyone and they can train on the ladder) | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 26 2010 09:44 skindzer wrote: Are 100% sure about this? I remember Blizz saying that they have no problem with tournaments being run with other maps and what the GOM people said is that they dont want to use other maps because they want GSL to be an open tournament where everyone has the same chances of getting in. (Ladder maps can be played by everyone and they can train on the ladder) No I'm not 100% sure, it's just what I hear. Which I just dismissed as rumor until John made that post, which states that yes custom maps did not work for the open events, and Blizzard would probably not even let them. While that logic 100% works for the Open GSL's, it's a little different now that but for Code S the logic doesn't hold. I don't have John's post link but it should be somewhere here on TL. So I am not 100% sure at all and it's just speculation. So take it what it is, just a curious situation based on Blizz's past statements. | ||
|
pezit
Sweden302 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES50536 Posts
On December 26 2010 08:27 iCCup.Diamond wrote: For what Junkka said, it's on the gomtv site on their forums, I'm pretty sure when there was that whole map rigging controversy (where Junkka explained the box he made). As for my other sources, well that's plain not public, but I never came out and said anything until Junkka did. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=173210 here's the link to that post. 2) Why not use custom maps? Because GSL is open tournament and people without team can only practice on ladder. Of course it is possible to distribute custom maps through homepage but sadly not all SC2 players watch GSL. I do not think Blizzard will approve it anyway. | ||
|
mardi
United States1164 Posts
| ||
|
TeWy
France714 Posts
The current balance of the game entirely revolves around timing pushes. Instead of complaining about them, you have to think about the deep reasons behind them and accept the fact that they aren't the same than in Starcraft 1. In Starcraft 1 people who all-in do it to catch their opponents offguard or because they're not confident to play a late macro game against someone. The reason we can assume that is because it has been proven (empirically) countless time that each race has a fair chance to win in the lategame. People just need to wake up and realize that it is not the same for Starcraft 2. Starcraft 2 late-game is not balanced. I know some people like to claim it is until they manage to convince everyone including themselves, but this is simply not the case. A lot of so called "cheesers" are just realist people who know that they will have a hard time in the later stages of the game, thus their best shot is to all-in. Zerg macro is not balanced, it can be proven mathematically, empirically... Terran can't beat a lategame protoss army... etc... These are issues that need to be adressed right now, because I've a hard time believing that the expansion will strenghten Terran/Protoss late game macro, or that a new Terran unit will be designed to counter Protoss late-game army. | ||
|
singularity14
44 Posts
| ||
|
Djeez
543 Posts
On December 26 2010 01:55 red_b wrote: watching steppes of war in the gsl would be like watching the dreamhack 1.6 finals start out on fy_iceworld. now that GSL isnt open, Oh man. This is totally going into my sig. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
I started out playing SC2, but it seems I play BW more and more now... | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
lol, and they start with all the guns laying on the ground too! | ||
|
Farkinator
United States283 Posts
| ||
|
the p00n
Netherlands615 Posts
On December 26 2010 07:22 DashedHopes wrote: I think they should be a little bigger but not too big or then Zerg is going to be an overwhelming race. The fact is though zerg is the race that wants to macro and sit back relax and Protoss and terran don't want them to do that and have to have some advantage to catch them off guard but not to just completely steamroll the zerg with 4 gate every game. In other words though zerg players need to have better game sense and expect something. "Prepare for the worst and hope for the best" The reason I'm replying to this, is because this is the biggest misconception I keep seeing more and more. Can anyone tell me how Zerg, with whatever army composition, is going to beat mass 3/3 battlecruiser with yamato cannon and ravens? How about some Thors mixed in? Zerg's macro strength is only visibly in early-midgame to midgame, in lategame a bigger map would be more advantageous towards T and especially P. I'd argue zerg has more problems regarding scouting (flying my first 4-5 muta into phoenixes I could have impossibly scouted), but this is not a racial balance thread - it is mostly about maps. | ||
|
PredY
Czech Republic1731 Posts
that arguement comes from terrans who can't change from their beloved 2rax marine scv allin or mass marauder ball, and no, that you tried 10 games macro style doesn't matter because it takes practise, i play macro for months and still lose to silly all ins etc. now to the matter of BO wins, guess what, if your opponent on steppes of war goes stim MM scv allin and you scout him go down his ramp you can't fucking even put up spine crawlers or moprh banelings because he is in your nat in 5 seconds so, for the love of god and the game, start using custom maps. | ||
|
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On December 26 2010 12:17 TeWy wrote: A lot of so called "cheesers" are just realist people who know that they will have a hard time in the later stages of the game, thus their best shot is to all-in. Sorry, but your argument is bullshit. The all-in / cheese players aren't people with a deep understanding of the game, able to flawlessly macro 5 bases while microing simultaneous drops. It's, like PredY said, someone looking for easy wins, and as long as the game allows for such a playstyle to reliably work, you cannot really blame them. Terrans' and Protoss' maxed army combined with their incredibly strong defensive potential makes them incredibly scary late-game. I should know, I did only Protoss all-ins during beta and then continued doing similiar stuff as Terran in retail. When I started going up to 2 and 3 bases later in my Terran 'career' I noticed how devoid of skill I was compared to those that tried to play a macro-game and had to learn everything from ground up, even more so when I switched to Zerg which just doesn't allow for such bull-shit all-in play as a viable choice of playstyle. If the maps were increased 2 to 3 times in size you would see the ridiculous potential of mid and late-game Terran and Protoss armies. If you just keep QQing about how impossible it is to play macro against Zerg or Protoss, you will inevitably be stuck at a low level of both skill and understanding of the game. | ||
| ||
