On February 26 2011 09:25 o3.power91 wrote:
oh dear god the close position bases are terrible T_T. Gonna cross out Slag, Typhon and Delta until Gulch proves to be equally terrible as well...

lol i agree

Cygon

New Zealand11 Posts

February 26 2011 00:31 GMT

#242

It takes ~10 in-game seconds to go from natural to natural on Typon Peaks after the destructible rocks have been cleared :/ This leaves zerg with about zero seconds to respond to any kind of mid-game push before them being at your doorstep.

Emperor_Earth

United States824 Posts

February 26 2011 00:32 GMT

#243

On February 26 2011 09:27 darmousseh wrote:
Blizzard must really like 2 base play. All of these maps are like 2 base maps.

Good catch. Now that I think about it, Blizz has been really pushing hard for 2 base play.

a176

Canada6688 Posts

February 26 2011 00:32 GMT

#244

The rest of the maps in high res

+ Show Spoiler +

avilo

United States4100 Posts

February 26 2011 00:33 GMT

#245

On February 26 2011 09:20 Mettyman wrote:
backwater gulch looks like a terran map*10^26

siege tanks on high ground to defend natural, nice one blizz

It's actually a protoss map. Protoss has 3 different entrances they can 4 gate you from so you have to build 8 bunkers to get your expansion up if you FE. It's not any better for protoss, as if they try to FE and you go for mass marine/marauder they will need 8 forcefield to block the bottom of their ramp that leads to their expo.

The map is basically telling you to play it 1 base style or to all-in or do something mega aggressive. And then if it does get to mid-game...as mentioned, tvz Terran will get a planetary at gold and be able to attack from every direction, not to mention siege tanks get a free watchtower to shell the opponent's gold...lol...

and collosus also will reign king on this map i'm pretty sure.

Rkie

United States1278 Posts

February 26 2011 00:34 GMT

#246

I was really hoping for some of the GSL maps...

Pros(For Me):
The best part of this other than new maps, is that they are bigger maps, which will lead to more creative and thought out strategy as opposed to cheesing.

Cons(For Me):
They took out Shakuras?!?
I do not like them too much, because there is not really a wide open area to be used for flanking. In huge battles, it will still be giant army pushing into the other.
I do not know too much about balance, but Backwater Gulch and Slag Pits seem very unbalanced positionally.

nathangonmad

United Kingdom317 Posts

February 26 2011 00:34 GMT

#247

Just played a few new games. these are terrible zerg maps.

raf3776

United States1904 Posts

February 26 2011 00:35 GMT

#248

On February 26 2011 09:32 Emperor_Earth wrote:

Show nested quote +

Good catch. Now that I think about it, Blizz has been really pushing hard for 2 base play.

I actually think theyre pushing for more than 2 base. its so easy to turtle on the new maps

Lokian

United States699 Posts

February 26 2011 00:35 GMT

#249

yea... big maps are getting boring. wait wait wait big army done -_-

SetStndbySmn

United States657 Posts

February 26 2011 00:35 GMT

#250

The destructible path on typhon is a joke.

Daria

Australia500 Posts

February 26 2011 00:35 GMT

#251

On February 26 2011 08:24 TUski wrote:
Was so excited for LT to be balanced, but at the cost of shakuras?

Blizzard needs to get new people in that office of theirs, their logic continues to baffle everyone who is any good at this game.

I agree, Shakuras was a great map.

Dalguno

United States2446 Posts

February 26 2011 00:36 GMT

#252

Does the narrow-ness of Typhon Beaks bug any other Zerg players?

Gecko

United States519 Posts

February 26 2011 00:36 GMT

#253

I'm disappointed, i wanted to see delta quadrant gone. But i'm glad jungle and blistering sands are gone. I wish they would have resolved some of the complaints people had about the maps, like the awkward naturals, but i think blizzard is heading in the right direction.

Velocity`

United Kingdom343 Posts

February 26 2011 00:36 GMT

#254

Taking a third on these maps is actually kind of difficult. I don't see why they got rid of Shakuras and put in maps with the same problem as the old ladder maps. Just why?

United States2586 Posts

February 26 2011 00:37 GMT

#255

Didn't they remove shakuras briefly and bring it back once before though? I hope it was just an oversight, it's one of the few maps that goes past 2 base for me.

Powster

United States650 Posts

February 26 2011 00:37 GMT

#256

Is shakuras really gone lol..? Never in a million years would I guess shakuras plateau would be one of the maps taken out. Hopefully they took it out for now just to have more play on the new maps or something.. I hope its not gone forever from ladder..

goldenwitch

United States338 Posts

February 26 2011 00:37 GMT

#257

blizzard, how can you make so many terrible maps in a row? Can zerg win any of these?

vrok

Sweden2541 Posts

February 26 2011 00:38 GMT

#258

On February 26 2011 09:35 raf3776 wrote:

Show nested quote +

I actually think theyre pushing for more than 2 base. its so easy to turtle on the new maps

1. Try zerg.
2. LOL.
3. ???
4. Profit.

It's so ridiculous it's unreal.

Tachion

Canada8573 Posts

February 26 2011 00:38 GMT

#259

I really really don't understand why Blzzard would put in 3 new maps(Not counting shattered temple since that's more of a 'fix' of LT) that have a 33% chance of being a god awful close position slug fest. Haven't they been listening that that is exactly what players DON'T want lately?