|
Along with the return of Shakuras, the EU server has seen a change to the infamous JB map (taken form the Shakuras thread).
In particular, a new gold expansion has been added which is in a very interesting location:
On January 21 2011 11:55 Zeon0 wrote:EU server: shakuras is back jungle has this new expansions: ![[image loading]](http://666kb.com/i/bqa9ve4dxt3wxtsyc.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://666kb.com/i/bqa9vl5r8tgfp62tw.jpg)
How do you think this new expansion will change the way the map is played? Does it make it more balanced? How does the fact it is a gold and not a normal expo affect gameplay?
I think this is a great step in the right direction for a horrible map. This expo should be much easier to defend UNLESS the expo is within range of tanks from the nearby ridge... then it's still bad.
However, as others have wisely pointed out, this helps terran as much if not more. Now terran have a gold they can PF up and control the only ent from that side of the map. On top of that I think tanks do cover that expo from the middle. If not they can still be used in an attack on the expo from a safe positoin. Seems like this change doesn't fix a broken map.
EDIT: Someone did a tank range test for us.
On January 21 2011 12:20 wat454 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 11:32 KrUtiAL wrote:
I dont think so. From what i can see the new base is posted right in front of the high ground for Terran(Siege Tanks, Reapers) and Toss (Collossi) to abuse. This might make the map even worse for zerg ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/S6btP.jpg) This is the farthest you can get with Siegetanks and they are out of range. And you Can only put max. 1-3 Siegetanks behind the mineral line because there isnt enough space for them. This is the only place i could get a siegetank behind the minerals or he would drive all the way around and go on the ground. How often do you see reapers in midgame/lategame? Colossi can harass that but for how long? The Toss has to move them up and down while is army will be behind the mineral line making the colossi vulnerable.
Here is a top down view of the map:
+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 16:12 smileyyy wrote:Heres a new picture of the map ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/6UkqR.jpg)
|
zergs will be happy for sure, and will probly make JB slightly more macro-ish rather than 2 base all ins.
|
i think this is going to make terran RIDICULOUSLY strong on this map, wtf
|
Lol, terrans will take their regular 3rd, and get that gold as their 4th for free.
Very amusing.
|
Yeah, this actually doesn't help anything.
I mean, nice try blizzard and everything, but this was the wrong move / location for the expansion.
This map is just SO CLOSE to actually being good, but its just missing a few very important details.
|
personally i still see terrans getting their third in the centre to control the map and then take the gold as a safe fourth.
though it will allow zergs a safe third so we will see some zergs standing more of a chance. however the question still remains.... where do we get a fourth???
|
good job blizzard lol. but then again we'll just have to play it out to see...
|
Interesting if true, however JB is still a tvp no-fun zone
|
this makes the map even worse - tbh this expansion is 100% in siege range also it looks like its a viable 3rd/4rd base for terran/protoss and for zerg there still isnt a viable 3rd.
had it veto'd before will stay veto'd - i expect more 6pools on that map in gsl matches
|
Why didn't they just make it a regular expo? :/ Don't really know if it will make things better or worse.
|
based on the location and distance I think in ZvT I would feel pretty darned uncomfortable with tanks parked on the high ground, offensively or defensively. Terrans would basically get an easily defensible 4th, which is also a gold...
dunno tho, we'll see how this plays out.
|
The map wasn't blizzard enough, so they added gold+more rocks, good move.
|
i wonder how this will change the gameplay, but i guess this change won't improve this map.
|
United States2227 Posts
Interesting.. can't wait for it to come on NA!
|
Maybe better for zerg? I might un-veto it and see how it goes
|
On January 21 2011 13:11 travis wrote:
i think this is going to make terran RIDICULOUSLY strong on this map, wtf
This is what I'm thinking :S
|
I just played a PvZ here and really enjoyed it. It's a good map now; taking a third isn't impossible.
|
seems like a decent change
|
Dunno really, from a first look at it it will still not be really good, at that expo is exposed like hell with 2 giant openings, high ground viability for long range units such as colousses/tanks (which is what I have most problem with on that map at least). But it's looking better at least, cant say that that expo is closer then the other third at least 
Let see how it plays out, dont understand really why they dont make new maps instead of working on maps people in general seem to unlike. (or at least thats what I'm getting from the forums about this map).
Nevertheless always nice to see some changes ^^
EDIT:Just remebered, if the tanks is on high ground that leaves a lot of room for flanking them while mashing it out with the main army on low ground, and mutas should be just better for defense if they aren't turretting it up on high ground for tanks, then that becomes another problem.
|
I can't wait to see this in the GSL
|
Hmmm.. Interesting change, gonna have to see how it plays out. Pretty sure I'm still going to veto it though.
|
I now foresee Terrans taking the offensive PF (their opponent's base) in the middle while their non-Terran opponent takes that gold as their third, which probably makes the map even worse.
|
I'm thinking the map will work if the two expansions can't be hit by siege tanks allowing Z an easier 3rd than it is now, though judging by the two tiny pictures, I'm guessing siege tanks will be able to hit the gold. Though I will reserve my judgement until I get a chance to play on them.
|
Much better. Split paths make it annoying, but it will make Zerg more comfortable earlish game. After that though, it will have the same problem relating to taking the next base, the 4th. We'll have to see how the expansion divides the sides, it could make taking a fourth easier (which would be good).
Note: Depends on how the expansion is laid out, I haven't seen an overview for proportion comparison.
|
On January 21 2011 13:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
personally i still see terrans getting their third in the centre to control the map and then take the gold as a safe fourth.
though it will allow zergs a safe third so we will see some zergs standing more of a chance. however the question still remains.... where do we get a fourth???
haha this made me laugh. It's like neverending greed: the zerg will keep asking for more bases. "Where do we get a 10th?" xD
|
Interesting change, im curious how Zerg gonna react now vs Terran in that map
|
On January 21 2011 13:23 W2 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 13:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
personally i still see terrans getting their third in the centre to control the map and then take the gold as a safe fourth.
though it will allow zergs a safe third so we will see some zergs standing more of a chance. however the question still remains.... where do we get a fourth??? haha this made me laugh. It's like neverending greed: the zerg will keep asking for more bases. "Where do we get a 10th?" xD
You can't deny the fact that taking a 3rd on this map is a pain for Zerg. And given the fact that Zergs need to stay one base above Terran, it'll be the logical next question. Not greed, just how the mechanics work.
|
When I try to play it it says "No servers are currently available".
Cool story, Blizzard.
|
As if Terran siege lines set up in the middle wasn't frustrating enough, a gold expansion tucked next to the main was given to them to bolster their defenses...
Then again, this map won't be a 2 base all in fest anymore. And I can at least expand to a third without worrying some shit is gonna get thrown at me from nowhere >.>
|
=( Just checked and still don't have it on the west coast. I'm excited to get shakuras back too!
|
Nice free 4th for the Terran. Mule those gold minerals baby!
|
Can you place a siege tank at the cliff in main and cover the gold? cus then you will see terrans go on 3 bases insanely fast on this map.
|
To quote someone else with a pic of siege tank range.
On January 21 2011 12:20 wat454 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 11:32 KrUtiAL wrote:
I dont think so. From what i can see the new base is posted right in front of the high ground for Terran(Siege Tanks, Reapers) and Toss (Collossi) to abuse. This might make the map even worse for zerg This is the farthest you can get with Siegetanks and they are out of range. And you Can only put max. 1-3 Siegetanks behind the mineral line because there isnt enough space for them. This is the only place i could get a siegetank behind the minerals or he would drive all the way around and go on the ground. How often do you see reapers in midgame/lategame? Colossi can harass that but for how long? The Toss has to move them up and down while is army will be behind the mineral line making the colossi vulnerable.
|
Uhm, why was this done? The map is horrible, and this makes it worst. Just get it outta the map pool Blizz. -_-
|
I'd rather play original JB as a zerg I think. With the gold being protected by rocks you're still unable to grab a good fast 3rd vs something like a protoss 14 nexus and later on it's a well defended 3rd for Protoss to get a ball going right out in front. If you try to backdoor the protoss, other than being FFed/cannoned your army is out of position and their counter-attack should be crippling. Especially since when Protoss is on 2 bases + gold you definitely need 4 bases.
Plus, above all else, you're expanding INTO your opponent with this third which is exactly what Zerg wants to avoid. Zerg wants to expand away from their opponent or in a direction that forces the opponent's army out of position.
Vs Terran it's a free PF.
TvP the map should be way better, as will ZvZ. I wouldn't hold by breath for TvZ/PvZ, nor would I take it off downvote.
|
Terran players will rejoice with the JB tweak, made a strong map for them even stronger, well done Blizzard.
|
just wait adn oplay and test it - before u make assumption - this gold is much easy to defnd for zergs aswell :$
|
I don't understand why they don't just put in a good map. This band aid over JB doesn't fix much. But maybe I'll un veto it and veto LT instead.
|
i agree, as a terran player i feel this is a free 4th vs zerg
|
That picture with the siege tank... Are you sure that placing the tank on that little nub of land that's one tank-length away won't put it in range of the rocks?
|
I think this map should just be scrapped. It's tiny and now there are too many expansions. God damnit.
|
Ehh.. The Gold expo was there when I did a custom vs AI 5min ago. But now it has disappeared again?
|
just wait adn oplay and test it - before u make assumption - this gold is much easy to defnd for zergs aswell :$
|
Fuck this map Thank god you can block 3 maps on ladder. I don't understand how hard is it to just look at maps like xel'naga or metaopolis acknowledge what makes those maps good and apply it to future maps. Meta would be the perfect map if they had spawns like shakuras
|
i just wish they'd get rid of those rock piles they're in love with. zerg is the only race that takes 5 mins to kill 'em.
|
If your going to take screen shots, could you at least get out some lings to illuminate the place first.
|
huh, it seems as though its notupdatign on my client to that new version of jungle basin, anyone confirm that it has reached NA?
|
Zerg could probably fast expand to this spot pretty safely.
|
I like the change this gives in TvZ, but i'm unsure about TvP.
|
on the one hand it discourages terran taking your 3rd expo at mid..on the other its puts your gold at the risk of siege tanks, gives the terran a free 4th (gold!), and encourages static defenses (bunker, mech, turrets) nonetheless i look forward to seeing how the match ups will evolve to accomadate this new expo.
|
On January 21 2011 14:01 Bijan wrote:
Zerg could probably fast expand to this spot pretty safely.
that would be a late expand because lings take forever to take down the rocks. also early pushes would be impossible to defend so zerg can't fast expand to the gold.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On January 21 2011 14:01 Bijan wrote:
Zerg could probably fast expand to this spot pretty safely.
Well if drones could somehow destroy the rocks with their amazing dps I'm sure.
 J/k, but try to remember that there are rocks there and also that a fast expand involves expanding fast and you cant really do that with high hp armoured destructible rocks.
|
isn't this an advantage for terrans?
they can easily now get 4 bases
you got your main and natural, that's a no brainer
now you can protect your gold while protecting your 3rd at the middle of map with siege tanks
|
so now T and P get a gold base while Z is still stuck with 2 defensible bases
what part of this map makes sense
|
|
|
I'm still voting this map down. There's way too many bases for how small this map is. I feel like any Z player would have to go air so that tanks and collosi couldn't hit the gold from the middle high ground
|
nice making jungle basin an even worse map for zerg
adding an easy gold that terran can defend, addendum to that they can siege up on high ground and easily take out the base if a zerg tries to take it rofl
|
Oh, so the ledge is only close enough for the terran to get the exact distance away from my hatch that he wants to be so he can stim marines in and out of their covering fire to kill my hatch and I have zero room to place spine crawlers to protect it AND I can't get lings up to his tanks without going past the bunkers he's going to place on the high ground.
The situation is exactly the same but each side just gets one more base. This map is intrinsically shit and it needs to be dropped. There are simply too many long narrow paths parallel to each other that make siege tanks and colossi far too powerful. The node points to these lanes (the position of the two central expos, the space between the main and the third, and the side expos) are utterly dominated by terran siege tanks and PF's with a horrendously long run around that makes flanking really hard to do. The map is a few short steps away from a nexus wars type map and it needs to die in a fire.
|
Why?
Why did it need this change? Terran can take that base so early its not even funny.
|
|
|
On January 21 2011 13:18 Megaliskuu wrote:
The map wasn't blizzard enough, so they added gold+more rocks, good move. omg I dont know why but this post almost killed me. So so true.
|
this map is turning out ot be even more awful for my style of play... will keep it veto'd ... nice try blizzard tho.
|
I think with a safer third base, you'll see zergs being able to take and hold the side expansions. Can't wait to see how this plays out
|
Well I certainly like it.
|
I think this will help PvZ but vs. Terran you must have control of your center expo or you can't secure the gold vs siege tanks. Zerg is still fucked.
|
wow i didnt think this map could get worse. boy was i wrong
|
This is awful, I've had more enemy armies camped in that spot than i've ever dared put a unit there myself. Except at my opponent's spot, camping there and having him unable to kick me out is a favorite past time.
Completely undefendable, as a protoss, anyway...
|
i fucking hate this map seriously
stop making tiny 2p maps -_-
|
THIS DOES NOT HELP ZERG for anyone who might be thinking that. If anything this makes it so Terran can get an EASY GOLD. Zerg can't FE to the gold, cause of the ROCKS....duh. So basically if Terran goes for 2 Rax FE on Jungle Basin into expo...he gets a GOLD for his second. And sorry for using so many caps but I mean...who at Blizzard thought this would be a good idea?? Is this change supposed to balance this heavily favored map (Favored for terran) in TvZ??
I mean yeah getting a 3rd for Zerg will be less of a problem now, but Terran 2 base with gold, versus Zerg 2 base with Gold...means a dead Zerg. I dunno..maybe I'm just being hypercritical but I can't see this working out too well...I mean, if the terran decides to go Plantery Fortress with turrets at the Gold for his second....well....GL HF Zerg players.
We'll have to wait and see how this pans out on ladder and in tourney's from now on. Hopefully it can work well as an experiment on how to balance some matchups on certain maps. And just to say something positive, It is great to see Blizzard trying to address map issuse for some matchups, but this might be the wrong way to do so.
|
On January 21 2011 14:24 GoldenH wrote:
This is awful, I've had more enemy armies camped in that spot than i've ever dared put a unit there myself. Except at my opponent's spot, camping there and having him unable to kick me out is a favorite past time.
Completely undefendable, as a protoss, anyway...
Blizzard new thats how the map is played and put it there for the other player to take, the one close to your main is not your expansion but your opponents its brilliant in its simplicity.
|
Dominican Republic913 Posts
On January 21 2011 13:12 ThaZenith wrote:
Lol, terrans will take their regular 3rd, and get that gold as their 4th for free.
Very amusing.
yeah prety much like that
|
I really pray that this map turns out to be very well balanced just so we can point and laugh at the first page of this thread.
|
Let's all play on the map before we start crying "Terran imba" shall we?
|
They could have just made the map taller and wider (more taller than wider) so that your third isnt right beside your opponent's third...
but i mean adding glittery things and giant boulders works too.
|
I think it's a bit too early to really judge the play on this map from all of the races. It was a T favored map and it still is a T favored map (if they take the centre of course).
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
The issue with Jungle Basin is that it is extremely difficult for zerg to take a third base safely, and near impossible to take a fourth. That's because the middle base and elevated area controls movement around the map, and if terran can take the middle portion, than they are almost impossible to defeat. Terrans are aided in this goal by the small corridors that make up the map, making proper zerg army positioning very difficult, and aiding tanks considerably.
In this way, putting an extra base there DOES give zerg a good option for a third, and a gold no less! But it also gives terran the same advantage, and the corridors and narrow passages exist here. Not to mention the terran can easily take this base from the relative safety of their main base, building a CC in peace, and then floating it out with tank support and elevator-ed bio. Control of this base makes taking the nearby sidebase almost impossible for zerg as well, forcing an expansion at the expansion near the terran's destructible rocks.
This change also does not fundamentally alter the architecture of the map that so favors terran; the mid-map is still king, and the terran can very securely take the middle, then take the gold behind that, giving terran a nearly insurmountable advantage at a similar time.
So this new base should give zerg an boost in the midgame, and perhaps they will be able to prevent terrans from establishing themselves in the map center. But if they don't, the game is even more over than it was before. And terrans will doubtless be able to take the gold base in new builds, which might show a trend towards more bio-based play; one rax expands into mass barracks, ect. This change probably gives zerg a small help, but not a significant amount, and really puts zerg on the knife's edge when it comes to timing.
|
There are like 20 people in this thread complaining about the new expansion being in range of siege tanks, when there is a picture clearly showing that is not the case.
I do agree though that the map size is retarded and it just needs to be completely overhauled. And what is with destructible rocks on every single map? Seriously Blizzard, just let us expand.
|
time to unveto this map.
i play P and until now have hated this map, but with this expo i feel the map is a bit better, would have prefered it to just be a standard expo with no rocks but w/e.
though agree it hasnt solved ZvT at all
|
Think people are a bit eager and jumping the gun claiming that it will favor Terran more then any other race when they haven't played on it or seen it played on since the changes? :| If it does have a heavy Terran bias like people are claiming then Zergs/Protoss will just thumbs down the map in GSL (assuming it's not one of the maps on the list to be removed in favor of new custom maps) - since they won't have to worry about Steppes / Delta / Blistering.
I think it could be an interesting change for the map, and most people were complaining about the map anyway so why not give it a chance before grabbing pitchforks ):
If anything I think the map looks a bit cramped now, they maybe should have added a bit more space when the gold was added...maybe
|
IMO they're trying to fix the problem the wrong way...yeah zergs have an easier third, but so do everyone else, and with Terran PFs that side of the map is easier to defend...the problem is the cliff and the fact that there are so many narrow chokes...ultimately it's the map architecture that ruins the map, not the placement of the bases.
|
I think if the middle area was made into a valley instead of a cliff, the map would finally be good. Of course, if they did that, they would have to cycle the map out because everyone would love to play on it, much like they did for desert oasis.
|
On January 21 2011 14:41 SenorChang wrote:
Think people are a bit eager and jumping the gun claiming that it will favor Terran more then any other race when they haven't played on it or seen it played on since the changes? :| If it does have a heavy Terran bias like people are claiming then Zergs/Protoss will just thumbs down the map in GSL (assuming it's not one of the maps on the list to be removed in favor of new custom maps) - since they won't have to worry about Steppes / Delta / Blistering.
I think it could be an interesting change for the map, and most people were complaining about the map anyway so why not give it a chance before grabbing pitchforks ):
If anything I think the map looks a bit cramped now, they maybe should have added a bit more space when the gold was added...maybe
That's a pretty terrible, indirect solution to a problem. The problem people are having with this is that Blizzard has been very slow to offer new solutions to the obviously horrible map pool, and now when they've FINALLY made a change it's a terrible change that doesn't have any effect on the features that made the map terrible in the first place.
The change is bad, adding more space would help the problem more than adding this gold would, though the map architecture would still make it bad either way.
|
Judging by the minimap, Terran can seige on the high ground and defend the mineral line right? I don't think it's that great to have an additional expo (let alone a gold) on an already very small map. Rather have Oasis back.
|
So I was playing this a bit as both Z and P and I find the gold bases to actually be harder to defend than the sides. So...pretty awful change...
|
Blizzard is so good at making maps.
|
I look forward to seeing what changes in strategy the changes bring about. Its too early to assume anything. I think its interesting Blizzard have done this, even if it doesn't have the desired changes in the end.
|
I think that all they have to do is flatten the middle high ground thingy...
|
Why the hell? Blizz needs to learn when to admit their mistakes and take these maps out. At least shakuras is back.... goodness...
|
Added tank range picture and explanation to OP.
|
Well this should help decrease the 97.5% win rate TvZ at the GSL. An interesting change to say the very least, I think it will take a lot of testing before we can see how it effects the match up.
|
I just checked in EU and I didn't see this map updated
|
the map looks wide in the ss is that just the ss or is it actually bigger
|
Don't see it making a better map for Z. Will probably remain downvoted for those who got it downvoted already. Can't they just remove it from the pool? -_-
2 narrow paths in the middle, no room for flanking or getting a good concave..
|
I think its interesting... map changes is always exciting!
|
Russian Federation174 Posts
lol wut? T favored map...
|
Hmmm.. I don't know what to say about this change... Only time will tell if its good or not..
|
Terran can use his siege tanks to damage the rocks while protecting his main. Awesome.
I honestly don't know if this change is good or not. Let's see.
|
I'm not sure the change is bad for zergs, if they can take and hold this third the map will start to play very differently. Now the map plays : zerg 14 hatch, then tries to get a third all game long and is denied that third most of the time, so they try and die and try again and die again. Now if they can have this base, they will be able to be aggressive.
I'm not sure, but we should wait to see how this will play out.
|
On January 21 2011 15:27 LoLAdriankat wrote:
Terran can use his siege tanks to damage the rocks while protecting his main. Awesome.
I honestly don't know if this change is good or not. Let's see.
|
On January 21 2011 15:31 MrCon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 15:27 LoLAdriankat wrote:
Terran can use his siege tanks to damage the rocks while protecting his main. Awesome.
I honestly don't know if this change is good or not. Let's see. http://i.imgur.com/S6btP.jpg
I'm talking about siege tanks positioned inside his main, not offensive siege tanks.
|
my biggest concern: There are a few spots where 1 tank can defend 2 expos very efficiently :/
|
This change will make it better for my ZvP build. I usually go 8pool and outright kill/wound the toss if they dont wall off. When they do they build a forge, block off and turtle till they wanna take their 3rd. By then I'll be on my 3bases. This time with these changes I'll have a gold base instead of a normal base if all goes well and voidrays dont jump up inside my ass :D
As you ZvT. I can't see this helping at all  But I will unblock it to give it a go. Maybe double expo to opposite side base to gold and also the gold base. Let the terran decide which one he wants to take out while I try my best to keep em from getting a 3rd XD
|
On January 21 2011 14:16 Ziggitz wrote:
Oh, so the ledge is only close enough for the terran to get the exact distance away from my hatch that he wants to be so he can stim marines in and out of their covering fire to kill my hatch and I have zero room to place spine crawlers to protect it
Exactly my thoughts after I saw the screenshot saying tanks are (barely) out of range.
|
On January 21 2011 14:01 Bijan wrote:
Zerg could probably fast expand to this spot pretty safely.
Do you even play?
|
United Arab Emirates660 Posts
On January 21 2011 15:32 LoLAdriankat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 15:31 MrCon wrote:On January 21 2011 15:27 LoLAdriankat wrote:
Terran can use his siege tanks to damage the rocks while protecting his main. Awesome.
I honestly don't know if this change is good or not. Let's see. http://i.imgur.com/S6btP.jpg I'm talking about siege tanks positioned inside his main, not offensive siege tanks.
Siege tanks in his main wont do shit, if anything they'll kill his own scvs due to splash damage!
|
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I can see terrans just putting a PF there and being even harder to break.
|
no amount of tweaking is going to fix this map.
|
They're too busy counting their earnings to come up with something other than a half baked idea to fix this map.
|
|
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Wow that is a strange shape for the map, just plopping that gold expo over there. They could have probably changed it a bit more to make the gold a little less... in the way. Gonna have to play on it a few times before I can comment on it.
Seriously people should try playing on it before making any definitive judgments.
|
It's like putting a flower on a pile of crap. cute.
|
Edit: Someone already posted
|
On January 21 2011 15:31 MrCon wrote:
u can't go closer via ground but u can drop it behind the minerals a little below and get in siege range while still being on the cliff
this map is just even worse than before for zerg and favors terran in a way i couldn't even ever imagine, grats blizzard
^this is not imbalance whine. its a love song based on a true story happened in a fictional movie
|
how is this map on the EU already I cant find it o.q...
Edit: OK I hat to play a 1v1 frist... :o
|
On January 21 2011 15:47 Lennon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 14:01 Bijan wrote:
Zerg could probably fast expand to this spot pretty safely. Do you even play?
LMAO!
|
Tanks been slightly out of range doesnt mean a thing imo
Groups of marine can stim in and out to hit the expo with tanks covering them very safely on the high ground, similar to the gold in blistering sands. In fact, i think, this gold for zergs is really easy to break as terrans can establish a really strong hold on the high ground with bunkers and turrets, tanks and just elevator marines to force a response
|
What i'm curious about is how easy it will be for an army to go camp at the main base's ramp and completely block off any expansion that was built at the gold minerals. It seems like in order to defend it the zerg would have to have control over the center of the map anyway...
|
terrible. More expansion for terran to break and push out and be able to defend easily. What make it better is that it is gold, which make it even better for terran who going bio. It make TvZ more imbalance on the map, since zerg will not be able to expand there with a freakin rock there and this does not help anything with the gold still being a terrible place to defend your expansion. I think the map need to be bigger, that the only way to fix this god for saken map.
|
This map now reminds me of a condensed version of Delta Quadrant, where one can only draw close positions and the middle corridor has cliffs to benefit T/P every step of the way. Zerg rage impending... (I play Terran btw :p)
|
I feel this is Blizzard's way of saying: We like TvT, deal with it... 'cause with these amazing changes, seems like they only want terran to progress in tournaments. Not that such thing isn't happening already, but they just wanna make sure.
|
On January 21 2011 13:16 Maedi wrote:
Interesting if true, however JB is still a tvp no-fun zone
I hate tvp and pvt on this map. Allining from either side is the best strategy in practically every case.
Anyway, they're listening to feedback and trying their best at least. I think blizzard will fix this map eventually.
|
Heres a new picture of the map
|
Lol so now there are 100000 expansions on this tiny map. Well... Somehow I still don't think adding expansions will improve the gameplay, rather we're going to see some hugh QQing when mules stack on that gold.
|
Terran will have a strong advantage when it comes to this map, with the gold base in seige range of the gold base
|
They need to just make all these 2 player maps 50% bigger instead of trying to do all this cute stuff. The game is broken on these Bloodbath maps.
|
It always felt like it was missing an expansion.
|
Why don't they just switch the freaking map for something else?
I'm so tired of games still being played on this map pool.
|
On January 21 2011 15:48 PaPoolee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 15:32 LoLAdriankat wrote:On January 21 2011 15:31 MrCon wrote:On January 21 2011 15:27 LoLAdriankat wrote:
Terran can use his siege tanks to damage the rocks while protecting his main. Awesome.
I honestly don't know if this change is good or not. Let's see. http://i.imgur.com/S6btP.jpg I'm talking about siege tanks positioned inside his main, not offensive siege tanks. Siege tanks in his main wont do shit, if anything they'll kill his own scvs due to splash damage!
He is talking about taking down the rocks. Terran can destroy the rocks from inside his base with tanks.
|
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map.
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
|
Umm that "siege tank test" that someone did and posted..
If you look at the picture you can see where he has sieged his tank and that its out of range. But if he unsieges and moves it alittle to the left to that little bulge and sieges there, he will be in range, so its gonna still bad.
And yes overall that is a very good placement for terrans with a PF, only has one side they need to defend that exp from and its from the front. Any muta harass will be terribly hard since there is not much space from which they can approach, and almost impossible to not take any damage when they retreat from it. If they now get in that is... but its not bad for zergs, it will be much better than it is now, I just would like the map to be a bit more stretched.. like 5-10 seconds more traveltime from base-to-base. or they could stretch it a bit more wider.
|
I am so happy that I'm no longer Z when I see this change, oh wow. I guess it'll be more interesting TvP now but.. Eh, it's still a bad map. Just give us back Shakuras.
|
actually they should increase the size of the middle pathway so that the expansions are further apart. then it will look a little like XNC
|
Feels too much like they're cluttering an already tiny map. Ought to widen the entire map before doing something like this.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On January 21 2011 16:41 vyyye wrote:
I am so happy that I'm no longer Z when I see this change, oh wow. I guess it'll be more interesting TvP now but.. Eh, it's still a bad map. Just give us back Shakuras.
It's already back!
|
I sure hope blizzard adds rocks and gold minerals to al the maps
/sarcasm
|
honestly, if they just could flip the center of the map on its vertical axis, it would actually feel a lot bigger and it would be easier to defend the gold expansion. instead of having a cliff overseeing your gold, it would be a wide ramp, and there would be little reason to cross the bottom left or top right of the map, until you want to defend your fourth which should be much easier by that stage of the game.
|
If this change was really intended to help Z having a though time (which is an understatement) on this map, I don't see it working it all. The map architecture still lacks open spaces for Z to engange in.
Additionally I personally feel that gold expansions are A LOT better for T than for Z cause their mineralsdumps are tons stronger and always have to be countered by gas-heavy units of Z. Same as on XNC or Metalopolis - if I haven't been on my 4th for a while when they take the gold I fall behind way too fast.
|
Wow this is such a terrible change. Terran can place a couple siege tanks up in their main and defend their gold base and also have the ledge in the middle to use as a pushing base to take out the opponents gold...
|
The gold expansion on this map feels so..... "Unnatural and forced"
Its totally going to mess up my 2base turtling into void ray colossus PvZ... LoL
I guess Zergs wont have an excuse anymore....
I think blizz should just introduce more new maps instead of trying to force changes like they did with desert oasis.... Eventually I think this map is going to fade into the shadows...
|
Hey, at least we know they want us to actualy take a third
|
Remember last time they heavily changed a map? Desert Oasis. It was then removed. Please let it happen to JB.
|
On January 21 2011 16:59 NineteeN wrote:
Remember last time they heavily changed a map? Desert Oasis. It was then removed. Please let it happen to JB.
Man I miss the old days of the fast Void Rays on DO in beta. Good times.
|
On January 21 2011 17:54 Demarini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 16:59 NineteeN wrote:
Remember last time they heavily changed a map? Desert Oasis. It was then removed. Please let it happen to JB. Man I miss the old days of the fast Void Rays on DO in beta. Dark times.
fixed :'(
damn those RapeRays!
|
woo hoooo
this would have made my game 12 hours ago so much easier
|
I like the new change. As a Protoss player I felt that this map favord us much more than Zerg and slightly more than Terran and that is a good thing (for a Protoss player) but not balanced. I think it is too early to say how matches will play out on new Jungle Basin, but I am excited to meet the new challange with the gold.
|
They still need to stretch the map a little in every direction make one or two more open passages. This whole map is one big choke.
|
On January 21 2011 18:07 Summerfield wrote:
I like the new change. As a Protoss player I felt that this map favord us much more than Zerg and slightly more than Terran and that is a good thing (for a Protoss player) but not balanced. I think it is too early to say how matches will play out on new Jungle Basin, but I am excited to meet the new challange with the gold.
I think it will just favour P/T over Z even more now. The 3rd will still be easy to get and there will be a super safe 4th.
|
Lol mech terran will be officialy unstoppable
|
On January 21 2011 16:39 Uncultured wrote:
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map.
However this does not alleviate the problem, since the player on the offensive still has high ground adventage plus the fact that if the zerg takes this base the terran can just take the other high ground position, making the gold unholdable for the zerg.
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
True we have units by then to kill it but not in reasonable fashion since the composition on this map has to be mutas for tier2, mutas and lings dont kill rocks very fast so the third will get delayed.
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
The agrument that terran can get an easier 4th does apply to the issues zerg's are facing due too the nature that zergs have to be one base up, lets not forget the fact that the 4th allows the zerg to mass the tier3 units he will need to break the highground siege line.
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
Every zerg player will conclude at first glance that this change will not balance this map TvZ wise, since the fundamental problems are still there.
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
Pessimistic? i admit some comments are like this map will never be balanced etc. cause i do think this map could be one of the most balanced maps if they just make the map bigger so your army doesnt get clobbured by highground siege tanks years in advance, plus on every attack route.
|
haha this is the best map I've seen so far for my tank heavy style. It looks amateurishly made and I think it will be very good for Terran
|
I would love to hear an official explanation on this one. I know there is next to no chance of that happening but really, I just have to fucking hear it.
|
did they downgrade it again? just tested some settings with my new keyboard and there was no gold (EU version).
|
On January 21 2011 18:26 idonthinksobro wrote:
did they downgrade it again? just tested some settings with my new keyboard and there was no gold (EU version).
Ladder has new custom games has old
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 14:35 tree.hugger wrote:
The issue with Jungle Basin is that it is extremely difficult for zerg to take a third base safely, and near impossible to take a fourth. That's because the middle base and elevated area controls movement around the map, and if terran can take the middle portion, than they are almost impossible to defeat. Terrans are aided in this goal by the small corridors that make up the map, making proper zerg army positioning very difficult, and aiding tanks considerably.
In this way, putting an extra base there DOES give zerg a good option for a third, and a gold no less! But it also gives terran the same advantage, and the corridors and narrow passages exist here. Not to mention the terran can easily take this base from the relative safety of their main base, building a CC in peace, and then floating it out with tank support and elevator-ed bio. Control of this base makes taking the nearby sidebase almost impossible for zerg as well, forcing an expansion at the expansion near the terran's destructible rocks.
This change also does not fundamentally alter the architecture of the map that so favors terran; the mid-map is still king, and the terran can very securely take the middle, then take the gold behind that, giving terran a nearly insurmountable advantage at a similar time.
So this new base should give zerg an boost in the midgame, and perhaps they will be able to prevent terrans from establishing themselves in the map center. But if they don't, the game is even more over than it was before. And terrans will doubtless be able to take the gold base in new builds, which might show a trend towards more bio-based play; one rax expands into mass barracks, ect. This change probably gives zerg a small help, but not a significant amount, and really puts zerg on the knife's edge when it comes to timing.
This change also does not fundamentally alter the architecture of the map that so favors terran; the mid-map is still king, and the terran can very securely take the middle
(Qouted that line of his whole post, since thats exactly how it feels to play)
Exactly spot on with everything you said, every terran I've met today just take controll of middle with rines/tanks and some either thors or either some marauders and just turret up and bunker if they wanna go overboard, and after they've established that middle base, they just get that 4 and the map feels once again impossible.
Though noticed a huge boost in army after getting the third as gold (duh). But still was able at least to make the terran exp a bit later then they want, which could be a good timing if you can take up to broods/infestors or something like that in the time you've been able to buy with the extra minerals.
Sry if I derailed it.
|
And blizzard have actually commented on the current state of the map pool
We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Source: Current state of the map pool
At least they are looking in to it. Just hope they don't insist that the map pool should offer 'different varieties of playstyles'
|
On January 21 2011 18:33 Vorenius wrote:And blizzard have actually commented on the current state of the map pool Show nested quote +We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Source: Current state of the map poolAt least they are looking in to it. Just hope they don't insist that the map pool should offer 'different varieties of playstyles'
A new Ladder Map Pool is nice. However the whole custom game system sucks big time. I want to play custom maps just as easy as the "hit play button".
|
On January 21 2011 18:33 Vorenius wrote:And blizzard have actually commented on the current state of the map pool Show nested quote +We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Source: Current state of the map poolAt least they are looking in to it. Just hope they don't insist that the map pool should offer 'different varieties of playstyles'
While I think that this is a good sign. I am very worried that they said their developers are working on maps. They don't know how to design maps, get someone else to do it.
|
I'm getting a bit tired of Blizzard applying the band-aid so they don't have to put in actual work and create better maps. I don't see this change actually making this map better or more people want to play it. The overall design of the map is bad and needs to be removed for something that is more fair towards all races.
|
if you're terran, you get the normal third in the middle, fortify it and then your fourth will be the gold and it will be free
|
I love the comments here.
If its easy to take its bad because Terran gets a free base.
If its hard to take its bad because Terran can deny others (most notably zergs) from taking it.
You do realize that Terran has had "an easy fourth" on XNC forever, right?
Awaiting "but that will give Terran a too easy fifth" argument regarding some map somewhere. I've still not seen that one yet but Im sure its just a matter of time.
|
I swear to God, Zerg will call even the SC2 version of "Luna" Terran favored.
|
Obviously just theorycrafting here but I guess that's the flavor of the day: It seems to me that while zerg always wants to be up in bases and thus wants it to be hard for P and T to expand, having more easily taken bases per player obviously benefits zerg because zerg can simply expand faster than terran can. The terran economy is much less flexible than the zerg economy and this change should favor zergs since they should be able to accelerate into taking the third way before terrans can and because the third is gold, this advantage in acceleration will be even more valuable than it would be on another map.
|
They turned jb into agria valley.
|
On January 21 2011 18:50 sqrt wrote:
I swear to God, Zerg will call even the SC2 version of "Luna" Terran favored.
Are you suggesting that Old JB, Delta Quadrant, Steppes of war, and lost temple are not terran favored?
I'm a pretty realistic when it comes to these things, and I don't its the zerg players whining more so than the maps being flat out imbalanced.
Try playing Zerg against a good terran on any of the maps listed, who knows how to abuse the map.
|
lol, this update would actually help PvP in that early game cannon cheese
|
On January 21 2011 19:10 Smigi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 18:50 sqrt wrote:
I swear to God, Zerg will call even the SC2 version of "Luna" Terran favored. Are you suggesting that Old JB, Delta Quadrant, Steppes of war, and lost temple are not terran favored?
I wouldn't go that far, but we see this whine every time. The map isn't even a day old ffs. Someone pointed it out "Easy second/third - Terran can get their exp easy. Hard second/third - I can't get my second/third easy". Do the maps need rebalancing? Hell yeah, but every time people try to talk about...anything...threads get buried by some sort of Zerg whine( god help the fool that goes into LR threads). .
|
On January 21 2011 18:48 Kreb wrote:
I love the comments here.
If its easy to take its bad because Terran gets a free base.
If its hard to take its bad because Terran can deny others (most notably zergs) from taking it.
You do realize that Terran has had "an easy fourth" on XNC forever, right?
Awaiting "but that will give Terran a too easy fifth" argument regarding some map somewhere. I've still not seen that one yet but Im sure its just a matter of time.
we are not argumenting that terrans have a easy base, since that doesnt actually matter its the sole fact that their easy base denies ours. and in turn grants the terran even more bases.
|
On January 21 2011 18:48 Kreb wrote:
I love the comments here.
If its easy to take its bad because Terran gets a free base.
If its hard to take its bad because Terran can deny others (most notably zergs) from taking it.
You do realize that Terran has had "an easy fourth" on XNC forever, right?
Awaiting "but that will give Terran a too easy fifth" argument regarding some map somewhere. I've still not seen that one yet but Im sure its just a matter of time.
This!
Zergs will have an easier 3rd imo with this change. Also, with 2 huge openings, if terran takes this, its very open to speedling harass.
|
On January 21 2011 18:20 Fadetowhite wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 16:39 Uncultured wrote:
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map. However this does not alleviate the problem, since the player on the offensive still has high ground adventage plus the fact that if the zerg takes this base the terran can just take the other high ground position, making the gold unholdable for the zerg. Show nested quote +
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
True we have units by then to kill it but not in reasonable fashion since the composition on this map has to be mutas for tier2, mutas and lings dont kill rocks very fast so the third will get delayed. Show nested quote +
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
The agrument that terran can get an easier 4th does apply to the issues zerg's are facing due too the nature that zergs have to be one base up, lets not forget the fact that the 4th allows the zerg to mass the tier3 units he will need to break the highground siege line. Show nested quote +
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
Every zerg player will conclude at first glance that this change will not balance this map TvZ wise, since the fundamental problems are still there. Show nested quote +
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
Pessimistic? i admit some comments are like this map will never be balanced etc. cause i do think this map could be one of the most balanced maps if they just make the map bigger so your army doesnt get clobbured by highground siege tanks years in advance, plus on every attack route.
I've never seen someone miss the point so... acutely. I'm hardpressed to believe you're either a troll or simply did not understand what I was saying. Every argument you presented is a straw man, circumventing the gist of my post.
|
Kind of looking forward to this if we see this elsewhere. :D
|
Is it just me or is this updated map NOT on the NA server yet?
|
On January 21 2011 19:40 doomed wrote:
Is it just me or is this updated map NOT on the NA server yet?
I think people have said a few times that it's on ladder but not on custom games. This could be EU/Sea though not sure.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 19:26 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 18:20 Fadetowhite wrote:On January 21 2011 16:39 Uncultured wrote:
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map. However this does not alleviate the problem, since the player on the offensive still has high ground adventage plus the fact that if the zerg takes this base the terran can just take the other high ground position, making the gold unholdable for the zerg.
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
True we have units by then to kill it but not in reasonable fashion since the composition on this map has to be mutas for tier2, mutas and lings dont kill rocks very fast so the third will get delayed.
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
The agrument that terran can get an easier 4th does apply to the issues zerg's are facing due too the nature that zergs have to be one base up, lets not forget the fact that the 4th allows the zerg to mass the tier3 units he will need to break the highground siege line.
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
Every zerg player will conclude at first glance that this change will not balance this map TvZ wise, since the fundamental problems are still there.
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
Pessimistic? i admit some comments are like this map will never be balanced etc. cause i do think this map could be one of the most balanced maps if they just make the map bigger so your army doesnt get clobbured by highground siege tanks years in advance, plus on every attack route.
I've never seen someone miss the point so... acutely. I'm hardpressed to believe you're either a troll or simply did not understand what I was saying. Every argument you presented is a straw man, circumventing the gist of my post.
well thankfully you put your point in a TLDR
The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
and all my arguments are based against this purely from a ZvT approach, so if you could elaborate your supposed point and how everything i pointed out is flawed in every single way i dont see how i missed to the point comepletly.
|
On January 21 2011 19:23 Fadetowhite wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 18:48 Kreb wrote:
I love the comments here.
If its easy to take its bad because Terran gets a free base.
If its hard to take its bad because Terran can deny others (most notably zergs) from taking it.
You do realize that Terran has had "an easy fourth" on XNC forever, right?
Awaiting "but that will give Terran a too easy fifth" argument regarding some map somewhere. I've still not seen that one yet but Im sure its just a matter of time. we are not argumenting that terrans have a easy base, since that doesnt actually matter its the sole fact that their easy base denies ours. and in turn grants the terran even more bases.
If you take a bit of time to read through the thread and the complaints you will find that this is indeed the source of plenty of whine. Maybe not yours, but a lot of others'.
|
On January 21 2011 19:48 Kreb wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 19:23 Fadetowhite wrote:On January 21 2011 18:48 Kreb wrote:
I love the comments here.
If its easy to take its bad because Terran gets a free base.
If its hard to take its bad because Terran can deny others (most notably zergs) from taking it.
You do realize that Terran has had "an easy fourth" on XNC forever, right?
Awaiting "but that will give Terran a too easy fifth" argument regarding some map somewhere. I've still not seen that one yet but Im sure its just a matter of time. we are not argumenting that terrans have a easy base, since that doesnt actually matter its the sole fact that their easy base denies ours. and in turn grants the terran even more bases. If you take a bit of time to read through the thread and the complaints you will find that this is indeed the source of plenty of whine. Maybe not yours, but a lot of others'.
ah indeed my mistake i should have said that i was not argumenting that since i enjoy playing vs a macro terran and macro games in general. i was more argumenting the fact that their base denies ours so easily, sorry.
|
Blizzard posted this in the EU b.net forums:
"We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Also Shakuras is back!"
So sooner or later, we're gonna get more maps!
|
Lol. Blizzard and their premature april fool's jokes :D!
They do a good job on reading on forums, watching GSL and listening artosis and tasteless comment on the maps. They probably stay in touch with strong players and well and get their opinion.
Then they come and try to make things right - without actually understanding the underlying problem.
It is true that the map will now favor longer games because the gold will be fairly easy to secure compared to the other expansions.
But what does this do to balance? The map is still very small. All this does is make it easier for terran to control the middle and makes it almost impossible to starve them because they will now have a gold expansion for free that cannot be attacked. This has to be every zerg's nightmare.
What would favor zerg? Imagine the map being twice as wide but until now there were no expansions to the very left (or right) of the map and they now suddenly added 2 expansions there. This would favor zerg.
Nice try blizzard. Nice try.
|
On January 21 2011 19:54 Lythox wrote:
Blizzard posted this in the EU b.net forums:
"We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Also Shakuras is back!"
So sooner or later, we're gonna get more maps!
We don't want more maps.
We want GOOD maps.
If Blizzard added 30 maps to the map pool, they would probably still be 50% crap.
It's nice in principle that new maps are being worked on, but when they say their developers, it's not such good news, because their developers suck.
|
On January 21 2011 19:45 Fadetowhite wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 19:26 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 18:20 Fadetowhite wrote:On January 21 2011 16:39 Uncultured wrote:
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map. However this does not alleviate the problem, since the player on the offensive still has high ground adventage plus the fact that if the zerg takes this base the terran can just take the other high ground position, making the gold unholdable for the zerg.
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
True we have units by then to kill it but not in reasonable fashion since the composition on this map has to be mutas for tier2, mutas and lings dont kill rocks very fast so the third will get delayed.
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
The agrument that terran can get an easier 4th does apply to the issues zerg's are facing due too the nature that zergs have to be one base up, lets not forget the fact that the 4th allows the zerg to mass the tier3 units he will need to break the highground siege line.
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
Every zerg player will conclude at first glance that this change will not balance this map TvZ wise, since the fundamental problems are still there.
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
Pessimistic? i admit some comments are like this map will never be balanced etc. cause i do think this map could be one of the most balanced maps if they just make the map bigger so your army doesnt get clobbured by highground siege tanks years in advance, plus on every attack route. I've never seen someone miss the point so... acutely. I'm hardpressed to believe you're either a troll or simply did not understand what I was saying. Every argument you presented is a straw man, circumventing the gist of my post. well thankfully you put your point in a TLDR and all my arguments are based against this purely from a ZvT approach, so if you could elaborate your supposed point and how everything i pointed out is flawed in every single way i dont see how i missed to the point comepletly.
You arguments are not flawed in every way. They are decent arguments. They just aren't what I'm arguing in any way, and in fact are straw-men. I'm saying until you have tested the map, many, many times, you wont have the evidence to support(or not support) your arguments. Until you show me a replay of top level players unable to take a 4th base easily against terran, on this new map, then all your ideas and beliefs are unsupported, and as such are theory craft.
It's pessimistic to immediately think that at top level play this is unbalanced, without ever seeing if it is indeed so.
|
What a terrible place to have a gold base, haha. JB was already a very strong Terran map in terms of positioning, and this gold base is in the middle of where they position themselfs! People need to understand if Terran gets "free bases" the zerg needs to grab an extra all the time. because of the way the map is built the middle "3rd" for Terran is very easy for them to acquire, the way they siege and build chokes there now a days will make the siege tanks defend the gold as well.
I think Blizzard was hoping zerg take a quick 3rd, but this only makes so that Terran can secure 3rd and 4th with the same line of defense..
|
The problem is that they took a rather dynamic world of warcraft battleground map (Arathi Basin) and tried to turn it into a Starcraft map. It would be a fantastic map to fight on if you didn't need a base.
|
On January 21 2011 20:17 Blackk wrote:
The problem is that they took a rather dynamic world of warcraft battleground map (Arathi Basin) and tried to turn it into a Starcraft map. It would be a fantastic map to fight on if you didn't need a base.
lol, never thought of it that way. doubt that was the thinking going into its creation though.
|
On January 21 2011 20:13 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 19:45 Fadetowhite wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 19:26 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 18:20 Fadetowhite wrote:On January 21 2011 16:39 Uncultured wrote:
The reason JB used to be bad for Zerg is because acquiring their third was very hard. This alleviates that problem, by giving them access to a gold base on their own side of the map. However this does not alleviate the problem, since the player on the offensive still has high ground adventage plus the fact that if the zerg takes this base the terran can just take the other high ground position, making the gold unholdable for the zerg.
Saying the rocks prevent you from expanding there for your third is utterly rediculous. You have units by then to kill them easily.
True we have units by then to kill it but not in reasonable fashion since the composition on this map has to be mutas for tier2, mutas and lings dont kill rocks very fast so the third will get delayed.
The argument that terran can get an easier 4th does not apply to the issues zergs were previously having on the map. If it become an issue somehow(I don't believe it will) We can then and only then infer that further changes should be made, or that the changes they made were not effective, or that the map should be removed. For all we know zegs are op when it's 3base to 3, and thus it makes it easier for them to get a 4th than ever terran. The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP.
The agrument that terran can get an easier 4th does apply to the issues zerg's are facing due too the nature that zergs have to be one base up, lets not forget the fact that the 4th allows the zerg to mass the tier3 units he will need to break the highground siege line.
Let's try to think of this more objectively people. Immediately jumping to the nearest bad conclusion(with literally zero first hand testing, all you people ever do is theorycraft) is a great way to remain frustrated for the rest of your time playing this game through the many patches and changes that are sure to come.
Every zerg player will conclude at first glance that this change will not balance this map TvZ wise, since the fundamental problems are still there.
How people have such a blindly pessimistic view of things and remain functional in life is beyond me.
Pessimistic? i admit some comments are like this map will never be balanced etc. cause i do think this map could be one of the most balanced maps if they just make the map bigger so your army doesnt get clobbured by highground siege tanks years in advance, plus on every attack route. I've never seen someone miss the point so... acutely. I'm hardpressed to believe you're either a troll or simply did not understand what I was saying. Every argument you presented is a straw man, circumventing the gist of my post. well thankfully you put your point in a TLDR The point is WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WILL EFFECT THE MATCHES ON THIS MAP. and all my arguments are based against this purely from a ZvT approach, so if you could elaborate your supposed point and how everything i pointed out is flawed in every single way i dont see how i missed to the point comepletly. You arguments are not flawed in every way. They are decent arguments. They just aren't what I'm arguing in any way, and in fact are straw-men. I'm saying until you have tested the map, many, many times, you wont have the evidence to support(or not support) your arguments. Until you show me a replay of top level players unable to take a 4th base easily against terran, on this new map, then all your ideas and beliefs are unsupported, and as such are theory craft. It's pessimistic to immediately think that at top level play this is unbalanced, without ever seeing if it is indeed so.
true it is theorycraft i guess.
|
It might not be correct but atleast blizzard is aware and not ignoring the problem, but imo i'd like to see new maps instead of modified old ones.
|
After reading this thread I have a couple questions:
1. How do we know this map is imbalanced? Do we have any statistics concerning matchups win-ratio?
2. How do we know the earlier version of JB was imbalanced? Statistics?
|
I don't understand why this gold expansion is regarded as easy to secure. I mean if you want to defend your main and your third with your army, than your army stands below a cliff, a rather awkward position.
|
This is the sort of change that either makes the map even more unfavored/favored for a certain race or actually brings som balance to it. Simply play before theorycrafting.
|
We really should wait and see. Perhaps this will change the whole dynamic, perhaps not. Perhaps it will equilibrate the balance, perhaps shift it even more.
But I see a big change, yeah, it's an easy base to take, but hard to defend as it's wide open (and on jungle, one of the core advantage for a terran was that its bases are harrass proof by ground)
With creep, perhaps zerg will be able to defend it well, and terran will now have to keep a lot of defense at his gold so he will not be able to push cross map as easily.
Just speculation, but let's see, not sure it's as bad as people think here.
|
Its an improvement. Every Zerg saying "but now terran can get an easy expansion too" just fails. You cant give a zerg expansions easy to defend without giving them everyone.
On the other hand, it will still be a terran favored map. Nothing will change that too fast. So, its fine, but the gsl should still remove the map from their mappool.
|
On January 21 2011 14:46 littlechava wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 14:41 SenorChang wrote:
Think people are a bit eager and jumping the gun claiming that it will favor Terran more then any other race when they haven't played on it or seen it played on since the changes? :| If it does have a heavy Terran bias like people are claiming then Zergs/Protoss will just thumbs down the map in GSL (assuming it's not one of the maps on the list to be removed in favor of new custom maps) - since they won't have to worry about Steppes / Delta / Blistering.
I think it could be an interesting change for the map, and most people were complaining about the map anyway so why not give it a chance before grabbing pitchforks ):
If anything I think the map looks a bit cramped now, they maybe should have added a bit more space when the gold was added...maybe That's a pretty terrible, indirect solution to a problem. The problem people are having with this is that Blizzard has been very slow to offer new solutions to the obviously horrible map pool, and now when they've FINALLY made a change it's a terrible change that doesn't have any effect on the features that made the map terrible in the first place. The change is bad, adding more space would help the problem more than adding this gold would, though the map architecture would still make it bad either way.
What I find funny is that it's such a small change. It's a 5 minute work. I can imagine them sitting their discussing maps and "working" on the map pool for 2-3 months and this is what the come up with lol.
|
Too bad the entire map is still 95% chokes and ramps. Forcefield-fest abound.
|
On January 21 2011 20:02 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 19:54 Lythox wrote:
Blizzard posted this in the EU b.net forums:
"We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Also Shakuras is back!"
So sooner or later, we're gonna get more maps! We don't want more maps. We want GOOD maps. If Blizzard added 30 maps to the map pool, they would probably still be 50% crap. It's nice in principle that new maps are being worked on, but when they say their developers, it's not such good news, because their developers suck.
I actually think that would be a fairly decent solution. They just mass-produce maps and then we get to vote them up/down on the ladder and perhaps also in internet polls etc. We would get a couple of decent maps then. And then those could be used.
There could constantly be another test-map-pool where this procedure would be repeated.
|
On January 21 2011 20:28 Sandermatt wrote:
I don't understand why this gold expansion is regarded as easy to secure. I mean if you want to defend your main and your third with your army, than your army stands below a cliff, a rather awkward position.
for a zerg it's definitely going to be a lot easier to secure. the reason the other 3 bases are soo difficult to secure are because the sides are so far away and the center is straight towards the same direction as your opponents main.
|
On January 21 2011 14:41 SenorChang wrote:
If it does have a heavy Terran bias like people are claiming then Zergs/Protoss will just thumbs down the map in GSL (
lol do you have any idea what you are talking about?
JB in incredibly good for P in this matchup, the backdoor warpin AND rocks allow you to do like 5 different one base builds to easily finish the game or heavily cripple the T unless he scouts it exactly. And lategame Terran can't expand much because the Protoss deathball can reach every location reasonably fast. Plus all the narrow chokes make it a nightmare vs storm/colo.
|
Don't assume every P loves 1 base play.
I was expecting a safer 3rd and/or that doesn't involve breaking rocks as P ~ Still veto-ing the map.
|
It's 10 times more of a protoss map than it is a terran map. Honestly though, use your vetoes wisely, don't talk too soon.
|
Here's something to chew on.
Imagine you're a Terran (and you're not BitByBit). What was your plan before?
On Jungle Basin, a Terran would take the middle blue base as his third, and turtle up there. This placed him within spitting distance of any potential third the Zerg would take. This is why it's hard for Z to take a third: A Terran can defend his own third while still being able to attack any base on the map. You basically have map control even while you're turtling.
If you do that now, the Zerg takes the gold. You can still attack it, but not while defending your own third. The gold is safer because attacking it exposes you to counter-attacks. So there's much less benefit to taking that middle now.
Instead, you're going to want to take the gold as the third. It's super-safe, and you can Mule it.
But now you have a lot less map control. . The Zerg can take the gold, the middle, or the side expansion closer to your natural. It's a lot safer.
That is the bigger effect of the golds. It's not that Blizzard went "Oh, you want a third base? Here's a base". Not exactly. But the fact that you COULD take the gold if Terran took the middle means Terran has no reason to take the middle. They'll take that tasty gold, and now Zerg gets the map control they need.
A terran can play for map control, or he can turtle. He can no longer do both at once. That's the point of the golds, not just a base for Zerg to take.
How well does that work in practice? We'll have to see.
I just hope this isn't like Desert Oasis, where they released a fix and killed the map two weeks later.
|
On January 21 2011 14:09 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
so now T and P get a gold base while Z is still stuck with 2 defensible bases
what part of this map makes sense
Doesnt Z also get a gold base? :D And in what way is it easier to defend as T/P rather than Z?
what part of your comment makes sense
|
Just another reason for Terran to sit and turtle with tanks...
|
what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes.
Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it".
Spoiled kids, you
Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
|
On January 21 2011 21:15 Siwa wrote:what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes. Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it". Spoiled kids, you Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
Why should you be happy about bad changes?
Just because you buy a game doesn't mean that you should take all the shit handed to you as gold. Shouldn't work that way.
The reason people are so critical is because Blizzard is notoriously bad at making maps and yet they control the ladder map pool. This becomes annoying when you have them make maps like Steppes and JB that are terribly imbalanced but are forced on you during ladder play.
Also retaining people to buy their next two FULL PRICE expansions will probably be a wise investment on their part don't you think?
|
On January 21 2011 21:15 Siwa wrote:what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes. Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it". Spoiled kids, you Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
Yeah lets all be thankful for bnet 0.2 and this fantastic map pool which must be used for all open tournaments since bnet 0.2 is so fantastic !!
People complain for a good reason Blizzard wants to make Sc2 into an E-Sports game. Well Bnet 0.2 is defiantly not the way too achieve that. If people could get decent games on custom maps nobody would care about Blizzards maps However they are the only way to practice for 99,99% and hence are used in tournaments people better dont stop complaining until the whole issue with bnet is taken care of by Blizzard
|
I think people need to stop immediately seeing ways that this will make the map even more imbalanced and instead try to figure out ways to turn this into an advantage for themselves
|
On January 21 2011 21:11 Sockpuppet wrote:
Just another reason for Terran to sit and turtle with tanks...
It's actually a good reason not to.
If Terran takes the middle and tanks like a bastard (the way TvZ normally works on this map), Zerg takes the gold and is even or slightly ahead.
If Terran takes the gold, Zerg takes his own gold, OR the middle, OR the base near Terran's nat, because Terran's turtling far away from those places. Terran's most comfortable fourth is the one near Z's backdoor rocks, which is ALSO not near any base the Zerg wants to take.
The changes are much more subtle and better thought out than people are saying, but only time will tell if it does much for balance.
|
On January 21 2011 21:22 Jameser wrote:
I think people need to stop immediately seeing ways that this will make the map even more imbalanced and instead try to figure out ways to turn this into an advantage for themselves
Sorry ? Switch Race ? :D. I
only played 3 games on the new JB and I suck at that game. So I cant really give a valued opinion on balance. However JB was ridiculous before and now it kinda got worse. The whole map design is meh.
|
On January 21 2011 21:15 Siwa wrote:what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes. Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it". Spoiled kids, you Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
People don't want the map fixed they want it REMOVED like most every other map in Blizzard's awful pool.
I myself just see this as a band-aid being applied to a wound that needs stitches. I am getting mighty tired of Blizzard's reluctance to properly set up a map pool that features balanced maps.
|
On January 21 2011 21:23 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:11 Sockpuppet wrote:
Just another reason for Terran to sit and turtle with tanks... It's actually a good reason not to. If Terran takes the middle and tanks like a bastard (the way TvZ normally works on this map), Zerg takes the gold and is even or slightly ahead. If Terran takes the gold, Zerg takes his own gold, OR the middle, OR the base near Terran's nat, because Terran's turtling far away from those places. Terran's most comfortable fourth is the one near Z's backdoor rocks, which is ALSO not near any base the Zerg wants to take. The changes are much more subtle and better thought out than people are saying, but only time will tell if it does much for balance.
This doesn't make any sense. The situation is still the same, terran can take the middle and zerg cannot. Both get an expansion and terran benefits from it even more than zerg because it is a gold.
the only way to fix the pool is to remove those godawful maps and put in Iccup or GSL maps instead. Those are made by humans using their brains.
|
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail.
|
I'm not entirely sure what I think of this change yet. As I play zerg I see this as a step in the right direction.
Taking a third will definately be easier now (for Z esp.). Defending this one will be lots easier than any of the other ones. Which means that if I can get a third up and at the same time hinder the T/P from taking his/hers third, I'll be in a good spot.
I'm gonna have to test it out alot before I can decide whether I like it or not though.
|
On January 21 2011 21:15 Siwa wrote:what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes. Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it". Spoiled kids, you Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
Well said, a few years ago i bought the board game monopoly for like 50 bucks... hasnt been patched ONCE since!
|
On January 21 2011 21:29 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:23 Ribbon wrote:On January 21 2011 21:11 Sockpuppet wrote:
Just another reason for Terran to sit and turtle with tanks... It's actually a good reason not to. If Terran takes the middle and tanks like a bastard (the way TvZ normally works on this map), Zerg takes the gold and is even or slightly ahead. If Terran takes the gold, Zerg takes his own gold, OR the middle, OR the base near Terran's nat, because Terran's turtling far away from those places. Terran's most comfortable fourth is the one near Z's backdoor rocks, which is ALSO not near any base the Zerg wants to take. The changes are much more subtle and better thought out than people are saying, but only time will tell if it does much for balance. This doesn't make any sense. The situation is still the same, terran can take the middle and zerg cannot. Both get an expansion and terran benefits from it even more than zerg because it is a gold.
Why the hell does the Zerg want the middle? Terran can take the middle, and Zerg can take the gold. Thus: There's no really good reason for the Terran to take the middle as his third anymore. The Terran takes the gold, which means the Zerg can take the gold AND the Zerg can take the base by the Terran's backdoor rocks as a third.
Sure, Terran can take the gold, and try to take the middle as his fourth and play like he used to. But now he gets that imba contain WAY later.
If the Terran takes the middle as his third, and thus lets the Zerg take the gold, he could try to take the gold as his 4th and stop the Z from getting a fourth. But keeping Zerg on 3 bases is a lot harder than keeping Zerg on 2.
|
On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail.
Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map.
The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage.
|
On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage.
This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking.
You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game...
|
I think some people are exaggerating how good this map is for Terran.
Yes a Terran can now get a third, but so can zerg. And i also see the 4th being easier for the zerg to take if they already have the gold.
Also zerg takes a much faster expansion than terran. This also makes sure than alot more games will go onto the lategame, which favors the zerg.
Point is, still a terran favored map, but not as much as before.
|
A bit off-topic but was SoW updated too? The version says 1.1 and I just noticed that the 3rd base has 7 mineral patches instead the usual 8.
|
I'm actually really excited to see how this works out.
Always liked the layout with a totally free expansion! A little harder third.
But now there's the possibility of a late game. Unlike before or Blistering where there's only 3 expansions pr. player.
And i've come to the conclusion that SC2 is balanced around gold expansions.
Awesome change! A map that favours immobility, but still has a lot of options for counterattacks.
|
I just logged in to test some stuff, and my Jungle Basin is the same as ever (at least in Custom Games).
Am I idiot, or was OP bullshitting when he said it was up in EU?
|
Sorry to be off topic slightly but when it auto downloaded a bunch of file ( new maps) , they were not only just LT , Shakuras , and JB, but there were maps like Xelnaga as well. Were there any changes to the other maps as well?
|
i think its an improvement for the map in gameplay. im not sure which race it will end up favor the most tho
its more comfortable to take a 3rd now which i think is great. if it still favors t/p too much they can always open up areas and make ramps wider etc
|
There's a whole lot of whining in this thread by a lot of people who haven't even tested the map yet. You might be right -- the changes might be for the worse, but at least have the decency to play a couple of games on it before you come to the forums and cry about how Blizzard loves Terran.
Some things to consider: in the old JB, any third you take is almost at least halfway into the map. If you both take the close expansions, you're about one and a half screens away from each other. If you take a side expansion, your expansion is far away from you and difficult to defend. This new expansion provides all races with a third that is close by their main base and thus quite a bit more easily defended. Your fourth is still difficult to take, but now it is less of a problem than everyone getting a free two bases.
This might still be a bad map, but give it a try before you complain.
|
hmm to be honest a base there is good, but it shouldnt be gold, the middle or sides should go gold
The rocks there are good too
|
no it was up in europe and i played it. then suddenly the old map came back. (i guess its a bug ?!?)
|
They should really get rid of all the high ground in the middle of this map, that will fix like 20% of the issues with the map.
|
Edit: Mistook the new bases for being a replacement of the center bases. My bad.
|
This is good for zerg really. While it does give Ts the ability to turtle on their 3rd and still have an easy 4th, it allows the zerg a 3rd that can't be raped just by the mere existence of a T presence in the center of the map. And that gold is actually going to make mutas and speedlings HELLA strong on this map due to how far the gold and nat are apart. I can see muta/ling/baneling being ridiculously strong on this map due to how hard it is for a t to deny the zerg nat, and if the zerg gets the gold decently early, it's going to be next to impossible for them to ever move out to take the center. Lets not act like T are aggressive macro warriors here. I mean...seriously, how often does a T ever get his 3rd before the zerg does? And by the time they usually do, the zerg third will be fully operational, plus it's a gold, so that a lot more crap t has to deal with.
Vs Protoss, however, the mere thought of cliffs right outside a nat, accessible only through a ramp that can be EASILY FF........ could be very sad for T and Z alike vs Toss.
|
i dont agree with it being gold. gold should be in the middle (no high ground please) and should be hard to defend.
it think these should be regular minerals and the gold should be in the middle.
|
Why am I the only that lacks Shakuras in my map pool?
|
kinda dissapointing we wont be able to see that cool barracks block off that bleach(?) used now because it would also block you from you expo
|
PF and tanks will dominate this map, at least thats my prediction.
|
If they wanted to fix this map, they should of turned the raised plateau in the center into a depresssion in the center, this would take away the massive terran high ground advantage and taking the gold would require defense other then from that plateau.
The largest problem is there is no flow to the expansions, safest third is the one that leads to your back door rocks, then you have to take one only defendable from where? terran will defend their gold from their main, and normal 3rd in the middle.
|
eh to me it looks like they just kinda threw in another base in an effort to try and make it a better map. i dont really like how it looks to be honest. i guess we'll see how it goes
|
On January 21 2011 23:20 Nerski wrote:
If they wanted to fix this map, they should of turned the raised plateau in the center into a depresssion in the center, this would take away the massive terran high ground advantage and taking the gold would require defense other then from that plateau.
The largest problem is there is no flow to the expansions, safest third is the one that leads to your back door rocks, then you have to take one only defendable from where? terran will defend their gold from their main, and normal 3rd in the middle.
I agree that there should be a depression and the two gold bases on low ground separated by some high ground. It's Jungle Basin anyway, isn't it? It makes sense.
|
why dont they put the golds in the center and make the side expansions that are supposed to be easier to keep regular mineral patches? It seems like a backwards attempt to make the map more balanced without actually doing anything to the map itself.
|
On January 21 2011 22:02 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage. This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking. You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game...
Ths is an insult to humanity and shouldn't be posted on the internet ( see? that sure was necesairy to get my point across ).
As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion. And yes I can and will kill off the rocks before I need my third expansion with my first set of units.
I was against the notion of having gold bases not be blocked by destructable rocks. Especially if that base is so close to the main. Terran simply has too much of an advantage early game if they can just swap their regular base for a gold one while the other races can't.
This isn't about finally having a third being defendable on Jungle Basin. The map in itself is a deathtrap for zerg. Even if we forget the expansion we just go we still have
- Destructable rocks to our natural.
- A far away choke from our main hatch that cannot be blocked by queens off of creep against hellions unless you're willing to sacrifice spawn larva's.
- Chokes on , well, EVERYWHERE.
- A juicy high ground for tanks which happesn to be in the center of the map, and which you cannot walk around without being in tank range if the terran secures those bases.
The only thing that favours zerg on that map is the easy to defend natural. And even then its more of an advantage to terran and protoss because they can just do whatever rush they want and still get a safe expansion up.
|
It could really help...
Because there is a window on this map where you can really control the map off 2 base as zerg. The problem always came taking the 3rd(which we all know). The big deal about that 3rd base is it gets you the gas you need for tier 3.
So I almost feel like this could really help zerg on the map regardless of what terran or toss get to do. Getting that 3rd base and the tier 3 units at the least gives you the ability to take out a terran holding the center or turtling behind a PF.
Or it could just prolong games another 5 minutes when zerg will just lose when it comes time to take the 4th.
|
On January 21 2011 22:51 Sm3agol wrote:
This is good for zerg really. While it does give Ts the ability to turtle on their 3rd and still have an easy 4th, it allows the zerg a 3rd that can't be raped just by the mere existence of a T presence in the center of the map. And that gold is actually going to make mutas and speedlings HELLA strong on this map due to how far the gold and nat are apart. I can see muta/ling/baneling being ridiculously strong on this map due to how hard it is for a t to deny the zerg nat, and if the zerg gets the gold decently early, it's going to be next to impossible for them to ever move out to take the center. Lets not act like T are aggressive macro warriors here. I mean...seriously, how often does a T ever get his 3rd before the zerg does? And by the time they usually do, the zerg third will be fully operational, plus it's a gold, so that a lot more crap t has to deal with.
Vs Protoss, however, the mere thought of cliffs right outside a nat, accessible only through a ramp that can be EASILY FF........ could be very sad for T and Z alike vs Toss.
Mutas are weaker than average on JB because there's little/no room behind or to the sides of the main and natural. Mutas can't really bounce between the two faster than the defenders can reposition. With no impassable terrain (pits or high cliffs) it's hard to get really strong harass on your opponent. With the gold like it is if Terran puts turrets there and at their natural then their main is pretty much protected from harassment because there's no viable route to get there without going over turrets.
|
On January 21 2011 13:12 ThaZenith wrote:
Lol, terrans will take their regular 3rd, and get that gold as their 4th for free.
Very amusing.
That was my first thought as well. O_o And while the base is just barely out of siege range that doesn't mean a Terran can't siege up on THE HIGH GROUND and smack you'r army around while his Marines come in and blast you'r expo. This will do nothing but amplify Terran strength...
|
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand.
|
|
|
On January 21 2011 13:11 travis wrote:
i think this is going to make terran RIDICULOUSLY strong on this map, wtf
any map with gold mineral is a strong terran map mules so good
|
The main reason I have this map veto'ed is because protoss can take their natural uncontested due to the tiny ramp that only requires 1 FF and then they can mass colossi and sentries and completely fuck you since every part of the damn map is too narrow.
I have a hard enough time as it is dealing with colossus death balls on semi open maps, it is bad for my mental health to try and ZvP on this map.
|
well this map is just stupid and this change won't change the gameplay on this map. its horrible designed and stays that way.
|
On January 22 2011 00:12 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 00:09 DuckS wrote:
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand. Agreed. It almost like the WoW community all started playing SC2 and got on TL to cry about imbalance. It's pretty sad.
Well there are still too many problems with the map, you don't have to play the new version to predict which race the narrow hallways and chokes will hurt the most, none of that has changed.
|
Agreed. It almost like the WoW community all started playing SC2 and got on TL to cry about imbalance. It's pretty sad.
Good thing Blizzard seldom caves in to whiners(otherwise zergs drones would have 60k hp and hit for 10k with a range of 50), they usually wait things out and think them trough properly, as much as people like to belive otherwise.
|
Well JB is still terrible b/c the chokes are way too small but hey, Blizz is trying so props to them. They made Desert Oasis a decent map by adding the rocks and then immediately took it out so who knows what's next.
|
My first guess is that in the future, instead of zerg, protosses will all veto this map down. T might become very strong against P on JB now.
But in general i like that we see mapchanges at all!!
|
On January 21 2011 23:48 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 22:51 Sm3agol wrote:
This is good for zerg really. While it does give Ts the ability to turtle on their 3rd and still have an easy 4th, it allows the zerg a 3rd that can't be raped just by the mere existence of a T presence in the center of the map. And that gold is actually going to make mutas and speedlings HELLA strong on this map due to how far the gold and nat are apart. I can see muta/ling/baneling being ridiculously strong on this map due to how hard it is for a t to deny the zerg nat, and if the zerg gets the gold decently early, it's going to be next to impossible for them to ever move out to take the center. Lets not act like T are aggressive macro warriors here. I mean...seriously, how often does a T ever get his 3rd before the zerg does? And by the time they usually do, the zerg third will be fully operational, plus it's a gold, so that a lot more crap t has to deal with.
Vs Protoss, however, the mere thought of cliffs right outside a nat, accessible only through a ramp that can be EASILY FF........ could be very sad for T and Z alike vs Toss. Mutas are weaker than average on JB because there's little/no room behind or to the sides of the main and natural. Mutas can't really bounce between the two faster than the defenders can reposition. With no impassable terrain (pits or high cliffs) it's hard to get really strong harass on your opponent. With the gold like it is if Terran puts turrets there and at their natural then their main is pretty much protected from harassment because there's no viable route to get there without going over turrets.
The thing is, though, unless Terrans have the center as well, they won't be able to defend both from ling/muta harass unless they have complete map vision. Think about it, if you run your mutas and lings into, say, the gold, and he moves his army in to defend....and at the same time you send 10 banelings into his nat......he's farked. I'd say its comparable to Shakuras on close ground positions if you take the rocks out. You have easy access to both side of his base and expos, while his army has to run back in forth in a long line through all his simcity and crap. And at the same time it gives zerg an expo that while certainly not well protected, it is definitely an improvement over their other options on the map.
|
This -_- doesnt do anything to help with JB
|
One thing that terran can do now is push through their back door and take the safer side base and easily attack the gold and center from there. Before when terran did this the zerg would take their own side base and it would end up being very match point esque, but the zerg was still stuck because there was no easy forth. I think this will become the norm in TvZ now.
Also if you do this you might even be able to hold the zergs gold from there for added lolz.
|
At least Blizzard is trying to make changes, they realise there is a pb with the map pool. We should be thankful for that.
|
Well, I think this is a step in the right direction.
If they can remove that little oasis of water in the middle of the map and make that a giant plateau, then I think zerg will finally have a shot on this map.
|
On January 21 2011 14:27 Noev wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 14:24 GoldenH wrote:
This is awful, I've had more enemy armies camped in that spot than i've ever dared put a unit there myself. Except at my opponent's spot, camping there and having him unable to kick me out is a favorite past time.
Completely undefendable, as a protoss, anyway...
Blizzard new thats how the map is played and put it there for the other player to take, the one close to your main is not your expansion but your opponents its brilliant in its simplicity.
Except you can't do that either, any ranged unit on that cliff is going to shut down mining. If they wanted your opponent to take it, they need to make the minerals face the other way. Either way, once your opponent takes his middle base, you're not going to be able to keep him from killing probes/the nexus, its one thing to say i can't be dislodged, its another thing to pretend i can just put my units on hold position and be safe.
|
I don't see how adding gold expos will make me want to unveto this map.
|
On January 22 2011 00:09 DuckS wrote:
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand.
The community asked and Blizzard granted? Seriously that is so far off the mark. Blizzard's track record so far when it comes to maps is nothing short of appalling.
Where to start? Why do Steppes and DQ still exist for one thing? I believe the community have shown themselves to be overwhelmingly in favor of these maps just being removed completely. Most would agree that they just aren't suitable for a competitive enviroment neither in terms of balance or entertainment. If Blizzard were truly listening to the community and trying to fix things, then these maps would already be long gone.
Now how about the positional imbalances that exist on certain maps? Why haven't they been fixed yet?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=155163
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=171033
The issues were first brought up months ago. No response from Blizzard. Community map makers solved the problems themselves with little difficulty. No response from Blizzard. Why haven't these refined versions replaced what we have now? They are indisputibly superior. It's a small thing sure, but such a simple change to make. The only explanation is that Blizzard just simply aren't interested in improving these maps.
Speaking of small changes, why on earth was Shakuras removed from the ladder map pool for such a long time? It was almost a month I believe. A small bug was discovered, one that can be quickly and easily fixed by anyone with any knowledge of the map editor but it took Blizzard an entire MONTH to do anything about it. How is that excusable? What possible cause could there have been for such a delay? We don't know because Blizzard have been completely silent on the issue not even informing us that the map was removed, why it was removed, or when it was returned. Nothing, the community was left to put the pieces together themselves. A single blue post on the Blizzard forums, some simple form of acknowledgement that Blizzard gives a fuck, is that really too much to ask?
Now back to improving the existing maps. Lets look at Metalopolis. Widely regarded as one of the more balanced maps, maybe that's something Blizzard should be proud of? Except for one crucial detail. TvZ close positions. There is pretty irrevocable proof that some imbalance exists in these specific locations. What can be done about that? How about what they did for Shakuras? Remove close position spawns. It has been suggested plenty of times, I believe polls have shown that a fair majority support this. It would help balance out the map, it would provide more entertaining games, and it would keep the community happy. Small tweak, all positivies. Not been done, why not? Who knows.
Now what about introducing new maps into the pool. Clearly several of the existing ones are very unpopular. Do Blizzard even need to make such new maps themselves? Not if they don't want to they don't because once again the community comes to the rescue.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/801781456?page=1
There are a large number of dedicated and talented map makers out there. All constantly churning out quality content that Blizzard just refuses to use. Again there is strong community support for this. What exactly is Blizzard's issue with this? We don't know, they don't tell us. It seems like a perfect solution to me. Rotate some of the more popular community maps into the ladder, with the map creators permission of course, if they work out well then keep them, if they don't then swap in something else. Only way we are going to find out which maps really work is if we have a large sample to work our way through. That large sample exists, why not use it?
I could go on but I think the point is clear. The community have been making every effort to reach out to Blizzard with help and suggestions, giving feedback, making their concerns known, even doing Blizzard's job for them and producing the content and fixes themselves and what is Blizzard's response?
More or less nothing. Dead silence on the issue. Then they give us this. An attempted improvement of a map that many feel shouldn't exist in the first place. Is this what they have been working on for the last few months? Was it thrown together at the last minute. We don't know, all we do know is that it doesn't look particularly promising. And even if it is, so what? Even if this changes JB from a shit map to an OK map, the overall pool is still pretty poor. And that is no ones fault but Blizzard's.
For the most part the community has been bending over backwards to assist Blizzard in this particular issue. If this is the best that Blizzard can come up with after so many months, then I don't see that encouraging at all.
Sure it's a step in the right direction. But it's a step so small as to be barely notable. I'm not impressed, and honestly I don't understand how anyone else can be.
|
Interesting... I hope this will give zerg the opportunity to get that third without too much trouble!
I dono why ppl are complaining without seeing any games on this map yet...
|
If I were a map designer,
I would put a new base just outside the natural expansion destructable rocks, and then make the middle expos gold (if there is a gold on the map at all)
possibly an extra walking path from JUST outside the rocks to the main middle part of the map. Ofc this would make it much easier to get from natural to main ramp for attackers..
I always felt like the 3rd base should be the one that continues the direction of your natural, but people always take the opposite one for reasons I can't understand, I guess the distance is further, but once someone takes that 3rd just up and outside your natural and when rocks are down its' very easy to get backdoored.
I'm just thinking outloud..
|
this new gold reminds me of Agria Valley
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/8t143.jpg)
and the maps are still not on the NA
|
Damn, I kind of liked how there was a map without gold minerals in the map pool. I guess there's still shakuras (apparently it's back now?)
|
man blizzard has a massive hard on for those destructible rocks
|
On January 22 2011 01:16 SugarBear wrote:
Damn, I kind of liked how there was a map without gold minerals in the map pool. I guess there's still shakuras (apparently it's back now?)
I do agree with you here.
What I would like to see for this map is that each path in the middle only reaches to one of the towers and is not directly connected to the other highground expansion anymore. This way both players get a tower to scout leading to players running around the other way. That way every expansion on the map has two entrances. I don't think the gold was necessary.
|
everyone complains about maps - blizz announces that they're making new maps - people complain they dont want blizz to make new maps - PR guy at blizzard jumps off a building.
you guys are so hard to please, already saying the maps you've never seen are crap
|
I vetoed the map, because since the last patch, ive got so many PvP´s its not even funny. Especially on this map, PvP is horrible. Sad, want to play the map versus terran or zerg ^^
|
I think that map needs to be made bigger...this is too cramped.
|
On January 22 2011 00:12 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 00:09 DuckS wrote:
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand. Agreed. It almost like the WoW community all started playing SC2 and got on TL to cry about imbalance. It's pretty sad.
What do you mean "almost?"
It is pretty ridiculous tho for people to be whining already without having played on it at all. Let's try to reserve final judgement until we've all played on it at least a few weeks.
|
On January 21 2011 23:28 Chaosvuistje wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 22:02 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage. This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking. You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game... Ths is an insult to humanity and shouldn't be posted on the internet ( see? that sure was necesairy to get my point across ). As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion. And yes I can and will kill off the rocks before I need my third expansion with my first set of units. I was against the notion of having gold bases not be blocked by destructable rocks. Especially if that base is so close to the main. Terran simply has too much of an advantage early game if they can just swap their regular base for a gold one while the other races can't. This isn't about finally having a third being defendable on Jungle Basin. The map in itself is a deathtrap for zerg. Even if we forget the expansion we just go we still have - Destructable rocks to our natural.- A far away choke from our main hatch that cannot be blocked by queens off of creep against hellions unless you're willing to sacrifice spawn larva's. - Chokes on , well, EVERYWHERE. - A juicy high ground for tanks which happesn to be in the center of the map, and which you cannot walk around without being in tank range if the terran secures those bases. The only thing that favours zerg on that map is the easy to defend natural. And even then its more of an advantage to terran and protoss because they can just do whatever rush they want and still get a safe expansion up.
What map are you talking about?
|
I don't really see a huge advantage to having a gold on the map. Playing as Protoss taking my third was done through walling off my main and killing the rocks at my natural and then taking the third up there, the fourth was crazy hard to take and keep. Now the same thing will happen... If you get a gold as your third then you are open to multiple sided attacks, if you take it as your fourth, then chances are the same thing will happen.
|
On January 21 2011 13:11 travis wrote:
i think this is going to make terran RIDICULOUSLY strong on this map, wtf
Beat me to it. Now Terran can denie anyone's gold by taking the middle while they themselves can safely expand.
|
On January 22 2011 01:05 Keitzer wrote:
this new gold reminds me of Agria Valley
Agria valley was the first thing I thought of. Its like they combined the two maps.
I don't really like this change. Not sure that it helps but I'll have to play some games on it before I make an opinion.
|
So terran take their third normally and then get a free gold fourth -.-
|
I can sort of see what they're going for with the not having to go all the way around for your next expo I guess, but it's still such a cramped area, seems to be even more so now. Also not entirely sold on tucked away gold minerals, but it's not my biggest worry here.
But oh well, I hear I've got Shakuras back which is at least fun some of the times, we'll see how things on JB develop. It should mix the flow of the map up a bit at least, but whether it'll be for the better..
|
For zerg, this will still be a horrible map, it might be a bit better but won't really change the outcome by much.
|
If that gold was a normal expo I would have liked the change. But gold so close to the main? One set of mules on it and the game is over.
|
When the hell is the US getting this update? I'm tired of waiting. :|
|
On January 21 2011 20:02 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 19:54 Lythox wrote:
Blizzard posted this in the EU b.net forums:
"We are looking into the 1v1 map pool and possible changes to it. Our developers are working on additional ladder maps and those maps will be included as soon as they are ready.
Also Shakuras is back!"
So sooner or later, we're gonna get more maps! We don't want more maps. We want GOOD maps. If Blizzard added 30 maps to the map pool, they would probably still be 50% crap. It's nice in principle that new maps are being worked on, but when they say their developers, it's not such good news, because their developers suck.
Being a little pessimistic here. Would you rather have them do nothing at all about the map pool and just leave it as it is?
I know many people would think it's great if they would hire some korean pro map makers, and I would definitely give props to them if they did, but as for now it seems they want to make the maps themselves.
Give them a chance, they are at least trying, and they have also made Shakuras Plateau and Xel Naga Caverns, which are imo pretty decent maps and enjoyable to play on, maybe they make 4 crap maps and 1 good one, thats still an extra good map.
|
I've read the thread, but I haven't seen a good comprehensive explanation of how the map is now sufficiently balanced.
ZvP:
It seems to help somewhat in ZvP, where zerg gets an easier 3rd that isn't far away, or very close to the middle. But while the gold seems easier to take, it doesn't seem easier to defend.
Also the change doesn't address the fact that the map is basically all chokes and corridors. FF + colossus still seems impossible to fight on this map.
ZvT:
It would appear that terran can park some tanks on the edge of their main, to defend their gold. In addition it seems that they can put a tank on the edge of the middle plateau and shoot their opponent (not at the position in the screenshot, it looks like there's a spot a tiny bit closer), but I can't tell since I can't play on the map.
The gold appears to slightly help z map balance, but not enough to make me un-veto the map. I guess If I see some decent replays or see a positive change for myself in custom games I'll change my mind, but not until then.
|
On January 22 2011 02:23 stevarius wrote:
When the hell is the US getting this update? I'm tired of waiting. :|
you got 1.2 before we did so it's only fair we get the updated maps first
|
On January 22 2011 02:02 Lythox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 23:28 Chaosvuistje wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 22:02 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage. This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking. You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game... Ths is an insult to humanity and shouldn't be posted on the internet ( see? that sure was necesairy to get my point across ). As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion. And yes I can and will kill off the rocks before I need my third expansion with my first set of units. I was against the notion of having gold bases not be blocked by destructable rocks. Especially if that base is so close to the main. Terran simply has too much of an advantage early game if they can just swap their regular base for a gold one while the other races can't. This isn't about finally having a third being defendable on Jungle Basin. The map in itself is a deathtrap for zerg. Even if we forget the expansion we just go we still have - Destructable rocks to our natural.- A far away choke from our main hatch that cannot be blocked by queens off of creep against hellions unless you're willing to sacrifice spawn larva's. - Chokes on , well, EVERYWHERE. - A juicy high ground for tanks which happesn to be in the center of the map, and which you cannot walk around without being in tank range if the terran secures those bases. The only thing that favours zerg on that map is the easy to defend natural. And even then its more of an advantage to terran and protoss because they can just do whatever rush they want and still get a safe expansion up. What map are you talking about?
i believe that to refers to the path in and not rocks inside the natural
if so, zerg gains the most benefit from those so i disagree with him anyway
based on not being able to wall/ff and being the most reliant on flanking
|
i have the map veto'd because of how dumb pvp is on it
this wont change anything
|
On January 22 2011 02:02 Lythox wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 23:28 Chaosvuistje wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 22:02 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage. This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking. You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game... Ths is an insult to humanity and shouldn't be posted on the internet ( see? that sure was necesairy to get my point across ). As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion. And yes I can and will kill off the rocks before I need my third expansion with my first set of units. I was against the notion of having gold bases not be blocked by destructable rocks. Especially if that base is so close to the main. Terran simply has too much of an advantage early game if they can just swap their regular base for a gold one while the other races can't. This isn't about finally having a third being defendable on Jungle Basin. The map in itself is a deathtrap for zerg. Even if we forget the expansion we just go we still have - Destructable rocks to our natural.- A far away choke from our main hatch that cannot be blocked by queens off of creep against hellions unless you're willing to sacrifice spawn larva's. - Chokes on , well, EVERYWHERE. - A juicy high ground for tanks which happesn to be in the center of the map, and which you cannot walk around without being in tank range if the terran secures those bases. The only thing that favours zerg on that map is the easy to defend natural. And even then its more of an advantage to terran and protoss because they can just do whatever rush they want and still get a safe expansion up. What map are you talking about?
Jungle basin, red circles are rocks, yellow ones are chokes.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/CtoeA.jpg)
|
If you get a gold as your third then you are open to multiple sided attacks, if you take it as your fourth, then chances are the same thing will happen.
I think what the theory is, and what they are going for is that regardless of what happens after you take your 3rd(the 4th being difficult, etc.) 3 bases allows you to have the gas you need to basically open up all tech options. It is really hard on 2 base to say, go tier 3 zerg, or for protoss to open up multiple tech paths.
Now if you can get to tier 3 as a zerg w/ 3 bases and the terran player is tanking/using PF you can get broods or ultras, or even go drop play etc. So even though there are still advantages for certain races at certain times the extra base will hopefully allow for better options to handle and counter those situations.
|
WTF?! Yes, because Zerg needs a gold expo that is blocked by rocks. Right... Why don't Zergs just roll over and die on this map now.
|
I don't quite understand how this is worse than before for Zerg. At least now they can get a 3rd base that isn't ridiculously far away and hard to defend.
|
As a Z player, I will leave this map thumbed down.
Good news about Shakuras and LT fix though.
|
Blizz just take this map out. Even if this map was twice as better as its original iteration, 2x0=0.
|
On January 22 2011 03:19 skipdog172 wrote:
I don't quite understand how this is worse than before for Zerg. At least now they can get a 3rd base that isn't ridiculously far away and hard to defend.
Gold expos are never that great for Zerg. Zergs tend to get gas hungry, and this map just gives a round of MULE's that much more power. Not to mention just having rocks there doesn't help zerg either. The structure of the map in general just allows Terran to maintain map control much better in general. Now Terrans can get that 3rd gold so easily by just making a 3rd CC and floating it down there. PF and it's secured. Not to mention shutting off a path to their base.
|
On January 22 2011 03:19 skipdog172 wrote:
I don't quite understand how this is worse than before for Zerg. At least now they can get a 3rd base that isn't ridiculously far away and hard to defend.
Its in no way worse for zerg, its just even better for terran.
|
Jinro is probaly crapping his pants right now
|
|
|
I feel like this will change the dynamic of this map very, very much.
The new bases now are right next to the side paths, which lead right to the enemy base. That path can now be used for attack rather then just worrying about defending it... if that makes sense. This is also interesting because you can catch the enemy army completely out of position defending their middle base rather then their gold by going the side path.
I'm really interested to see how this will play out.
|
I think this help Terran a lot, thanks Blizzard.
|
Anyone else unable to make this map as a custom game?
|
afaik they havent updated the maps for the custom game list yet, while they are already updated on the ladder mappool. for example, i cant load the new version of jb in the editor, when i try its still the old version without gold bases.
|
Great..
So Terrans will PF up their normal 3rd, and then get their 4th gold for free!
Hurray ...
|
in some ways terran can def that expansion with siege tanks on their own cliff.
|
On January 21 2011 13:23 W2 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 13:14 TyrantPotato wrote:
personally i still see terrans getting their third in the centre to control the map and then take the gold as a safe fourth.
though it will allow zergs a safe third so we will see some zergs standing more of a chance. however the question still remains.... where do we get a fourth??? haha this made me laugh. It's like neverending greed: the zerg will keep asking for more bases. "Where do we get a 10th?" xD
Play Zerg for a bit. You'll understand why this isn't greed.
|
Where to start? Why do Steppes and DQ still exist for one thing? I believe the community have shown themselves to be overwhelmingly in favor of these maps just being removed completely.
You believe wrong.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1020862313?page=10#195
Steppes is popular with a sizable chunk of the player base. Team Liquid != The Starcraft Community.
On January 22 2011 04:07 RESTRiCT wrote:
So Terrans will PF up their normal 3rd
Why would they do that? Terrans did it before because all the places Z wanted a third were practically in tank range. Now they have to get quite a bit out of position to block Z from taking the gold (leaving them open to counter attacks). There's no longer any real advantage to taking the middle natural as their 3rd. Terrans would rather take their gold and expand down the side of the map towards the Zerg's map.
This gold base is a much bigger change than people are giving it credit for. It makes taking the high ground significantly less useful for Terran, and puts the new third way from the middle. These means Terrans won't play this map at all like they used to, because that's much less good. They'll go down the side of the map instead (letting the Zerg take the other side).
|
On January 22 2011 03:19 skipdog172 wrote:
I don't quite understand how this is worse than before for Zerg. At least now they can get a 3rd base that isn't ridiculously far away and hard to defend.
It's probably not worse for Zerg, people are overreacting a lot in this thread. I would guess it's slightly better for Zerg since it's now realistic for us to get a 3rd and eventually a 4th base up. The problem is it doesn't help greatly either because 1. it has rocks which is bad for Zerg, 2. it's a gold, which while it does help Zerg also makes it great for Terran because of mules and most importantly 3. the fundamental layout of the map hasn't changed. It's still extremely easy for Terran to control the whole map by getting up his third (and then expanding backwards to the gold at his leisure).
|
I just got on bnet today and I see shakuras added by jungle basin still doesn't have gold expo. I haven't played it on ladder but I checked pic and still the same and I played in custom and it's still the same. Has Na got the update yet?
|
Tbh I think it's going to look like.
Zerg can get an easier 3rd, but a 4th will be even harder to get then a 3rd is now.
Terran will get a free gold 4th.
Basically the overall game length on JB will increase by maybe 5-10 minutes, but the win%'s will stay the same, if not increasing in Terrans favor.
vs protoss? it wouldn't matter if we had 20 available expansions, the chokefilled pathways means your roach/hydra/corrupter kills about 10% of the protoss army
|
I have to agree that while this will be better for zergs by having an extra expansion, it will be very imba for terran. As soon as they get their 3rd up, they can set up siege tank lines, missile turrets, and have an incredibly strong defensive position, without sacrificing any macro.
I'm terran btw.
|
On January 21 2011 13:12 ThaZenith wrote:
Lol, terrans will take their regular 3rd, and get that gold as their 4th for free.
Very amusing.
I play random and thought exactly this lol
|
On January 22 2011 04:20 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +Where to start? Why do Steppes and DQ still exist for one thing? I believe the community have shown themselves to be overwhelmingly in favor of these maps just being removed completely. You believe wrong. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1020862313?page=10#195Steppes is popular with a sizable chunk of the player base. Team Liquid != The Starcraft Community. Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 04:07 RESTRiCT wrote:
So Terrans will PF up their normal 3rd Why would they do that? Terrans did it before because all the places Z wanted a third were practically in tank range. Now they have to get quite a bit out of position to block Z from taking the gold (leaving them open to counter attacks). There's no longer any real advantage to taking the middle natural as their 3rd. Terrans would rather take their gold and expand down the side of the map towards the Zerg's map. This gold base is a much bigger change than people are giving it credit for. It makes taking the high ground significantly less useful for Terran, and puts the new third way from the middle. These means Terrans won't play this map at all like they used to, because that's much less good. They'll go down the side of the map instead (letting the Zerg take the other side).
You aren't thinking 4th dimensionally (gogo Christopher Lloyd).
While I agree that Terran would need to go out of position to prevent a Z or P from securing their 3rd, the issue is the placement of the gold expo easily allows the terran to secure their 4th. And you have the same issue as before...however now terrans can mule the gold under the security of their already stacked 3rd base.
The primary issue I have upon first glance is tank placement can easily defend both their 3rd and their 4th.
When it hits NA we will see how it pans out, but my initial take on it is that it doesn't really change much. If anything it gives a Terran the ability to mule a gold with confidence in long drawn out games.
|
WOOT ITS ON NA!!!
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Jk8Lr.jpg)
idk if it's the updated Jungle Basin (b/c the preview doesn't look like it) but i'm guessing it is since Shakuras is back up
|
Since they fixed Shakuras, I wonder if they fixed LT. Has anyone looked / tested it?
|
On January 22 2011 04:46 Keitzer wrote:
WOOT ITS ON NA!!!
idk if it's the updated Jungle Basin (b/c the preview doesn't look like it) but i'm guessing it is since Shakuras is back up
I booted up, made sure my maps were ladder compliant, and tested the map. No new gold bases, same Jungle Basin we're used to. This may soon change, just felt like reporting it in.
|
On January 21 2011 21:15 Siwa wrote:what the fuck people so critical about all the changes blizzard makes. Show me game studios that goe "ahh community doesnt quite like the map.. lets try to fix it". Spoiled kids, you Sometimes be appreciative of what you get with 60 or so bucks.
However!
We pay 60 bucks for a game that is constantly changing and evolving. In other words, unlike a monopoly board, you WILL see changes. Seeing we bought the game, it entitles us to express our opinion regarding the product that has been bought by us as customers.
It would be different if they would deliver the game without additional changes afterwards. Then we have no say in how to do things.
|
On January 22 2011 05:48 Heraklitus wrote:
Since they fixed Shakuras, I wonder if they fixed LT. Has anyone looked / tested it?
If you are thinking about the flower "bug" for zergs, yes its been fixed, there was another thread about that.
|
+ Show Spoiler +
I don't really like the changes. Really zerg is still hard pressed to keep a third. Why? Take a look in the spoiler. The red area is all the places zerg has to protect, and then as you can see the black area is where tanks can hit them.
What's going to end up happening is tanks go there, and then they send a small like 8 rine force to just take out the hatch. Meanwhile zergs can't kill them because tanks are there. Eventually they'll be forced just to go in and try to bust, and I'm unsure as to whether that will be a good thing for zerg.
|
I think the wait and see approach is best here. Only because if Zergs spend time controlling the region where the Gold is while keeping up a fair amount of harass/pressure, there are not doing so bad. Controlling a 3rd base now is easier then controlling a 3rd base as it was before, and the discrepancy in income could lead to a stronger army/ quicker replaced army. I see the tank issue, but its only an issue if they can get there which would be harder now that the income for Zerg would have spiked and they would have a veritable creep highway to the backdoor entrance to the enemies natural where as before it would have been considered extra work.
|
LOL even without trying it, zergs go crazy... in negativity? lol, this is a buff to zerg. You get a free 3rd out of siege tanks high ground range. And now you're pissed cause you can't get a free... fourth? Seriously stop it lol
|
Other than being pretty much a free third within siege range to take down the rocks for Terran.. Its kind of nice to have another OPTION as Zerg, but its not really leaning towards balance.
|
On January 22 2011 06:42 Healingproof wrote:
LOL even without trying it, zergs go crazy... in negativity? lol, this is a buff to zerg. You get a free 3rd out of siege tanks high ground range. And now you're pissed cause you can't get a free... fourth? Seriously stop it lol
Please actually think about what your saying before you actually say it.
|
On January 22 2011 06:42 Healingproof wrote:
LOL even without trying it, zergs go crazy... in negativity? lol, this is a buff to zerg. You get a free 3rd out of siege tanks high ground range. And now you're pissed cause you can't get a free... fourth? Seriously stop it lol
cause giving zerg a third while you give terran a fourth is the recipe for a balanced map
|
Just a question: Isn't the gold extremely difficult to defend with zerg anyway? I mean do you see how cramped it looks? A ramp in one direction, two chokes, and a cliff? I guess you can with spinecrawlers, but seriously, that doesn't look easy to defend from any direction (for zerg).
This really looks like it makes it easier for Protoss and Terran to take an expansion, not zerg...
|
If terrans are defending their 3rd/4th with siege tank/thor/missile turret heavy armies... you can grab broodlords... The middle position over the (now) 4th base is perfect for broodlords. Usually by the time im gearing up to grab and saturate my 4th I can get broodlords out.
Also, with the extra income from the gold (should puts zerg pretty mineral heavy at this point) throw down some static D at your 3rd.
|
kinda wtf.. if a zerg takes that as his third and terran seiges at the zergs middle expand, zerg cant reinforce the third without running through tankfire. terran could just seige up, grab a small bioball big enough to lol through whatevers currently at the gold and kill it without the zerg having a hope of saving it.
|
Interesting changes. Aggressive positioning is going to be something I'll have to consider as a Zerg player. I can't decide if its more advantageous to position my ground forces on the middle high ground or lower side lane when trying to secure the gold third. Either way I'll be wanting to position themselves really close to the opponent or hope for really good muta play otherwise they could do a simple cut maneuver to deny the gold third. I'm going to have to make sure those Seige tanks don't get anywhere near those high ground sweet spots.
+ Show Spoiler +
Terran Elevator Plays and Staggered Tanks could to be challenging to deal with (a good timing attack would do me in). I'm probably going to be experimenting with double expanding a little less thanks to the changes though.
|
If your letting the Terran get his tanks and you are giving him the time to position and siege them behind the minerals, you should rather just gg from the very beggining.
I have no idea how this will play out, as a Zerg I would prefer to take the high groung 3rd if terran is taking the gold, and the gold if therran is takng the high ground expansion, if I can´t expand faster than them then I`m just doing something wrong.
|
Well at least i can now use the veto system.
|
I'm jusr glad to see sakuras back on the map pool!
|
On January 22 2011 07:12 PiLoKo wrote:
If your letting the Terran get his tanks and you are giving him the time to position and siege them behind the minerals, you should rather just gg from the very beggining.
I have no idea how this will play out, as a Zerg I would prefer to take the high groung 3rd if terran is taking the gold, and the gold if therran is takng the high ground expansion, if I can´t expand faster than them then I`m just doing something wrong.
Thats actually a really good point. If terrans start opting to take their 3rd as their gold base (they will) it might be more advantageous for the zerg player to take the middle base as his 3rd and start creeping up to their 4th while you take the gold as the 4th.
|
lol that map is even worse
seriously i higly doubt a professional terran will ever loose on this map vs any zerg
But thank god its out of the GSL and other tourneys will follow soon, so back to the shredder
|
Actually played it in a PvP and forgot about it. Will try and use it next time.
|
so. most peoples problems with jungle basin is terran taking his nat. then the center 3rd with planetary and using that as a staging point to hit all 3 possible 3rd bases for the other player and their solution.... is to put a 4th. gold base. inside that area that terran locks down as part of the strategy?
sure it will give P and Z a 3rd base they can take but wow.
|
On January 22 2011 07:18 Mutarisk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 07:12 PiLoKo wrote:
If your letting the Terran get his tanks and you are giving him the time to position and siege them behind the minerals, you should rather just gg from the very beggining.
I have no idea how this will play out, as a Zerg I would prefer to take the high groung 3rd if terran is taking the gold, and the gold if therran is takng the high ground expansion, if I can´t expand faster than them then I`m just doing something wrong. Thats actually a really good point. If terrans start opting to take their 3rd as their gold base (they will) it might be more advantageous for the zerg player to take the middle base as his 3rd and start creeping up to their 4th while you take the gold as the 4th.
Terran players take more than two bases?
|
On January 22 2011 07:23 Silverymoon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 07:18 Mutarisk wrote:On January 22 2011 07:12 PiLoKo wrote:
If your letting the Terran get his tanks and you are giving him the time to position and siege them behind the minerals, you should rather just gg from the very beggining.
I have no idea how this will play out, as a Zerg I would prefer to take the high groung 3rd if terran is taking the gold, and the gold if therran is takng the high ground expansion, if I can´t expand faster than them then I`m just doing something wrong. Thats actually a really good point. If terrans start opting to take their 3rd as their gold base (they will) it might be more advantageous for the zerg player to take the middle base as his 3rd and start creeping up to their 4th while you take the gold as the 4th. Terran players take more than two bases?
Only the good ones.
|
Very funny. The third is precisely why terran is so strong on this map.
|
Jungle Basin is the only map where I'd recommend a team to fire their Terrans over not taking three bases and turtling like a madman
|
Interesting that they chose to put it there. I would think that putting the gold between the natural and the backdoor third would've made more sense. Or even in the middle of the central low ground paths.
Can't wait to try it.
|
On January 22 2011 00:20 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 00:12 zeru wrote:On January 22 2011 00:09 DuckS wrote:
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand. Agreed. It almost like the WoW community all started playing SC2 and got on TL to cry about imbalance. It's pretty sad. Well there are still too many problems with the map, you don't have to play the new version to predict which race the narrow hallways and chokes will hurt the most, none of that has changed.
even so, it would be really nice to see people at least ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that blizzard is working on fixing the problems. like many other people have said, it's at least a step in the right direction and it's way too soon to pass complete judgement on the map. terrans won't have 60 siege tanks and 5 PFs at 10min into the game. just play it out, see what happens.
|
at EU the old version is back?
|
EU is updated and I just played a few there. It feels way more comfortable to take third now, although I feel like it will get more T and P favored again when it's time to take a fourth... so I think it is an improvement, but not a final solution.
|
Worse then steppes for TvZ now...
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 22 2011 03:03 Chaosvuistje wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 02:02 Lythox wrote:On January 21 2011 23:28 Chaosvuistje wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 21 2011 22:02 Uncultured wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 21:55 Chaosvuistje wrote:On January 21 2011 21:29 Airfan wrote:
Blizzard has to get rid of the ideas of high yield minerals and rocks at expansions. It would be nice if you could take a (edit: more or less secure) third quickly but those stupid rocks just delay the time when you can actually take it to when you normally would want to take a third. Design fail. Yep, let the terran lift off their CC and plant it at the base with gold minerals 40 feet away. That'll balance the map. The day I see JB and Steppes removed from the mappool is the day I start believing in God. I honestly don't see blizzard making more balanced maps, they should make a different 'pro' ladder where people can play ladder on GSL maps and stuff, not this 1base garbage. This is a failure of imagination, and critical thinking. You can easily kill off the rocks before you would need your third. Unless you forgo making units for the first ten minutes of a game... Ths is an insult to humanity and shouldn't be posted on the internet ( see? that sure was necesairy to get my point across ). As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion. And yes I can and will kill off the rocks before I need my third expansion with my first set of units. I was against the notion of having gold bases not be blocked by destructable rocks. Especially if that base is so close to the main. Terran simply has too much of an advantage early game if they can just swap their regular base for a gold one while the other races can't. This isn't about finally having a third being defendable on Jungle Basin. The map in itself is a deathtrap for zerg. Even if we forget the expansion we just go we still have - Destructable rocks to our natural.- A far away choke from our main hatch that cannot be blocked by queens off of creep against hellions unless you're willing to sacrifice spawn larva's. - Chokes on , well, EVERYWHERE. - A juicy high ground for tanks which happesn to be in the center of the map, and which you cannot walk around without being in tank range if the terran secures those bases. The only thing that favours zerg on that map is the easy to defend natural. And even then its more of an advantage to terran and protoss because they can just do whatever rush they want and still get a safe expansion up. What map are you talking about? Jungle basin, red circles are rocks, yellow ones are chokes.
That's a very interesting drawing you made there and it surely makes your point look valid, but you said you need to take down rocks to get your natural expansion which is bullshit as even your drawing you just made shows. I'll quote to help out nonetheless: "As zerg I CAN'T just go 1 base and get 10 zerglings to kill the rocks later for my first expansion." You don't need to go 1 base since you get a free natural on the map.
Either way I agree the map is shit for Zerg though. Never stated otherwise.
|
|
|
Canada13389 Posts
Looking forward to trying this on NA when I get a chance to ladder. Though I don't think it will be that great for Zerg still tbh
|
ZvT will still be horrible on this map because Zerg has no cost efficient way to control space. Terran will still get the plateau basically for free while Zerg cannot defend the outer bases. If we only had lurkers...
|
The copy of Jungle Basin on the NA Starcraft 2 Editor is still the old one. I publish a copy of all the 1v1 maps with Fyn AI and would really appreciate it if someone on EU help me get a copy of it so I could update my Jungle Basin map with Fyn AI. Could someone point me to a copy of the new Jungle Basin or export it out of the map editor and upload it somewhere or what ever is most convenient? Pleeeeeeeeeeease
|
That is... interesting.
Was it Steppes of War or Jungle Basin which were the maps to be taken out from the GSL?
|
JB needs MORE expansions. Another base at the out perimeter 1o'clock and 7o'clock. Also, another one on the interior 1o'clock and 7o'clock. MOAR BASES.
|
First of all, JB needs to be more of a square and less of a rectangle.
Damn corridors of death.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 22 2011 07:44 WarSong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2011 00:20 Treemonkeys wrote:On January 22 2011 00:12 zeru wrote:On January 22 2011 00:09 DuckS wrote:
My god, people. Can we at LEAST give this map more than two days before flaming each other and Blizzard? This is almost all pure theory, half of you probably haven't even played on it yet - in fact, 3/4 would be a safer assumption, as, a large amount of you are American. This is just pure frustrating - cry, cry, cry, "f u blizz omg", "mor liek ACTIVBLIZZ LOL".
This here is the reason alone why sc2 will never surpass BW - everyone has this tearful imbalance mentality, supported from their teenage angst.
Now, this third base. I don't understand the complaint with the rocks - Z's third on LT has rocks in the way but everyone is just fine and dandy with that. I'll admit making it gold is a little questionable, but, this is a step in the right direction. You, the Z, should be taking your third eons before the T should even be considering getting his. I've read every page in this thread, and I feel like half of you think the T will have a siege tank army with 4 planetary fortresses all over the map 7:00-8:00 minutes into the game. C'mon. The community asked, Blizzard granted. Let's work with it and see what happens, because, this flaming mentality from our fellow TL keyboard warriors is just getting pure out of hand. Agreed. It almost like the WoW community all started playing SC2 and got on TL to cry about imbalance. It's pretty sad. Well there are still too many problems with the map, you don't have to play the new version to predict which race the narrow hallways and chokes will hurt the most, none of that has changed. even so, it would be really nice to see people at least ACKNOWLEDGE the fact that blizzard is working on fixing the problems. like many other people have said, it's at least a step in the right direction and it's way too soon to pass complete judgement on the map. terrans won't have 60 siege tanks and 5 PFs at 10min into the game. just play it out, see what happens.
The problem is just how the strategy will play out. It's still a fight to the death to prevent a PF popping up at that 3rd. It's very difficult to effectively kill a terran army near a pF so you have to drag that army out and cut it up or hit a more vulnerable base... or just simply power overwhelm it. If that 3rd still goes up, the Terran will be able to still use his excellent position to storie otu kill the 4th or more importantly move up and deny toss/zerg 3rd forth by taking the opposite spot and cutting off forces.
Tldr there is a fundemental issue, though I admit I am still thinking this through because you can stretch it somewhat to cover something like xel naga.
|
before everyone starting a flame about this change i would really like to see this map played few times . when everyone played it 20-30 times ok say its bad or good but saying it before even tryed ... well i dont think its a good way to discuss 
so afk playing JB
|
New JB isn't online on LA servers yet, so I doubt it will till monday, is it online on NA (US) server?
Edit: New Shakuras (1.2), Blistering(1.1), Steppes(1.1), Xel'Naga Caverns(1.1) and Lost Temple(1.1) are online. Delta Quadrante, Scrap Station, Metapolis and Jungle Valley are still 1.0.
|
havent really read ALL the posts on here but cant siege tanks still harass the mineral line (if T is bottom and Z/P on top) from the left ridge where the ramp is at?
i know units can get to the siege tanks but it still makes it a nice fortified choke with siege tanks on both high ground and the main army on the choke
|
Just played a ladder match last night on the european ladder with the updated version and wanted to practice against friend in a custom game as well, but for custom matches theres still the old version? Or is just something wrong on my part?
|
A Planetary fortress at that location will be nearly impenetrable especially if terran sets up some siege tanks on the edge of their base for support.
|
I think people should just play it out first.
Sure if the terran sets up his normal third he has a 4th that is basically free. But how was this really different from how the map played before then once the third was set you could take the watch towers and push for a fortress at the other central base.
Now if zerg take the gold as their third they can then take the side base as their 4th.
Yes terran have the ability to take a fifth easier which is still bad for zerg however I would think that having your natural, the gold, your main, and the side base would be preferable to JB with no gold base where your 4 expos look like this: main, natural, side base, and side base.
One makes you more spread out than the other.
Probably still going to be t favored but like others have said this is at least a step in the right direction. I mean would you have rather them say, "hmmm zerg need another base lets put right at the base of the watchtower."
|
|
|
On January 21 2011 13:11 travis wrote:
i think this is going to make terran RIDICULOUSLY strong on this map, wtf
I can't wait to see what IdrA has to say about this ...... will be so funny
|
That change is like putting lipstick on a pig...glad to see its being removed from the ladder and the foliage fixes .
|
I'd like to see the high ground in the center have no expos and all the expos are aroun dthe outside. that would make the strategically most important area also the least rewarding economically. and i think would make the game more interesting.
|
people are so retarded. this change will only effect TvZ balance if anything. people pointing out where you can put tanks as a way to prove imbalance has been a classic mistake in discussing map balance. so the fuck what if you can load up tanks around hte gold/middle expo. the zerg will now actually have a possible expo to put pressure on the terran 3rd (although I admit that this map could be ballsack for ZvT still).
this really won't change PvT at all just because there is another base. if anything this will remain a protoss map.
|
On January 21 2011 13:40 Reptilia wrote:
i agree, as a terran player i feel this is a free 4th vs zerg
e:nvm
if they want to keep that map for some reason, other expos had to added. i'm not sure about the place. seems to easy for terran to hol with their reg 3rd. i'm not complaining as much as most of my zerg buddies here tho. feel like the matchup might improve a little because of more zerg opportunities / expos.
|
Does anyone know why they are not using the PTR to test potential ladder maps? It seems like that might be a useful thing to do when they are not testing balance changes. I understand not testing balance changes on untested maps however.
|
Has anyone played on Agria Valley? Its like a better version of JB. Im sure someone will point out an imbalance but i love this map.
+ Show Spoiler +
There is some distance between the main an natural but the towers provide decent coverage and its not to hard to defend.
I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this map. (Especially if you have played on it)
|
I've played Agria. It's not bad, but it suffers same as JB with a lack of bases to take.
I thought JB was being removed? Is it updated or removed?
|
On January 23 2011 17:50 phrenzy wrote:Has anyone played on Agria Valley? Its like a better version of JB. Im sure someone will point out an imbalance but i love this map. + Show Spoiler +There is some distance between the main an natural but the towers provide decent coverage and its not to hard to defend. I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this map. (Especially if you have played on it)
As zerg i find it terrible. The ramp is too far from the nat, so u HAVE to go roach against anything, Protoss can FF it so easily it's not even funny. There's so few expos it favors allin, and the rush distance is retarded. Good luck taking a 3rd as Z. I really hate JB, but it's not as worse as Agria.
|
and hopefully wont put it back in unless it's like doubled in size and has 4 more(on the map, not per side), real, expos on it :D
|
AAAAAH FUCK I can't believe I didn't see that gold base. I just lost a fucking long game against a protoss.
'I'm so ahead,' I thought to myself. 'There's no way he can feasibly catch up to me again.'
10 minutes later I see a mined out gold expansion and I'm like 'WHAT THE FGYDYGSDAYGDSSDGDHGDGDFDFDSH WHO PUT THAT FUCKING THING THERE??!!!'
And then I lost to about 30 HT's.
|
Well see what happens with time, blizzard needs to be taking out a lot of the maps on ladder and getting some better ones, steppes and delta are still horrible for us zergs
|
So Terran was already OP on this map and by the looks of it, Blizzard is favoring Terran even more. CC --> PF = GG if it's held long enough. (sigh) However. . . maybe Zerg can utilize this to its own advantage, hopefully
|
Just hopped on to NA Bnet to find Jungle Basin gone from the map pool? At last!
Can we hope to see another map in its place soon?
|
I don't want gold minerals in this map, i just want it gone =[
But the re-working is a step in the right direction for Blizz.
|
well that sure is weird....yeaa not sure if i like this against terran that seems too easy to take..def helps the zerg though
|
it's a bad change, or not really helpful, but at least it shows MAYBE they can hear people saying 'this map is godawful'
|
i dont understand, if blizzard removes Jungle Basin why they dont remove maps like Steppes of war-_- .... i think jungle basin is more "balanced" than steppes of war is.
|
Although still imbalanced for zerg I liked this map as it is very easy to bum rush another player as 90% of the players will choose to fast expand, making a baneling bust all-in quite easy to succeed. (as of now, people in Plat don't really scout that much, haha)
The gold will probably encourage the players to FE even more. Yikes.
|
On January 26 2011 09:10 Sealteam wrote:
Just hopped on to NA Bnet to find Jungle Basin gone from the map pool? At last!
Can we hope to see another map in its place soon?
Both Jungle Basin AND Shakuras have been removed fro EU I liked Shakuras, why did they remove it AGAIN?
|
Meh...I don't know about anyone else, but I would just rather they spend their time making new maps instead of playing around with the old ones...
|
On January 26 2011 14:48 Zwingly wrote:
i dont understand, if blizzard removes Jungle Basin why they dont remove maps like Steppes of war-_- .... i think jungle basin is more "balanced" than steppes of war is.
I disagree, taking a third as Z is alot safer than on JB, and the T third doesn't suddenly give him a platform to attack all other bases quickly.
Regardless, I did untick JB on SEA with the new gold, the base really doesn't help that much as it is still as venerable as the other expansions, and if you do manage to take and hold it, if the T gets the usual middle base and PF's it, they get a free gold behind it and deny your 4th.
|
Just log on to SEA and Jungle basin has been reverted to its original version. Without the gold .
|
great, at least for now ill be able to pick maps i want to play on ladder.
LT Meta Steppes Xelnaga
|
On January 26 2011 14:48 Zwingly wrote:
i dont understand, if blizzard removes Jungle Basin why they dont remove maps like Steppes of war-_- .... i think jungle basin is more "balanced" than steppes of war is.
it's an illusion that comes from the fact that imbalances on SoW come out early in the game while JB becomes imbalanced only after P/T reach a critical mass.
|
yeah i just played a game on Jungle Basin today and i was really puzzled to see that it's been reverted back to the original. the new expansions on both sides are gone!
edit: i play on the SEA server
|
So what about Shakuras? Is it in the mappool or not? Sorry, can't check right now.
Thanks in advance.
|
Shakuras is up. Atleast on Euro, but I'm fairly sure it's up on all servers.
|
On January 26 2011 19:51 Amestir wrote:
Shakuras is up. Atleast on Euro, but I'm fairly sure it's up on all servers.
thanks, kudos to you, sir.
|
On January 26 2011 19:55 ICA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2011 19:51 Amestir wrote:
Shakuras is up. Atleast on Euro, but I'm fairly sure it's up on all servers. thanks, kudos to you, sir.
Unfortunately its not Shakuras gone again on EU
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/hDd0E.jpg)
(Picture taken couple of minutes ago)
|
can confirm it: jb and sp are currently not in the ladderpool
|
On North America we still have Shakuras, but Jungle basin is gone. We got the better deal imo.
|
Man I wish they'd fucking tell us when they're fiddling with the map pool, rather than having to trawl TL to find out.
On Jungle vs Steppes, in the GSL Jungle has a worse record for ZvT than Steppes, possibly the stats on the ladder show the same?
|
JB is gone on US server but Shakuras is still in.
|
Show nested quote +On January 26 2011 20:26 Kelwyn wrote:On January 26 2011 19:55 ICA wrote:On January 26 2011 19:51 Amestir wrote:
Shakuras is up. Atleast on Euro, but I'm fairly sure it's up on all servers. thanks, kudos to you, sir. Unfortunately its not Shakuras gone again on EU (Picture taken couple of minutes ago)
Why do we always have to suffer?
|
Too lazy to read through all the pages but...
just kind of wondering to myself.
What do you guys think would happen if the high-ground in the middle of this map were actually low-ground?
It'd make map control via tanks a lot harder. But then I guess collosi shooting into that hole would be kind of annoying...
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/DPuNz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa30/Everonis/6UkqR_edited.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/3/3e/Agria_Valley.jpg/400px-Agria_Valley.jpg)
