EPTNew Maps in 1v1 Pool - Page 18
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
fadestep
United States605 Posts
| ||
|
Lucius22
172 Posts
| ||
|
Saracen
United States5139 Posts
On February 26 2011 11:09 WniO wrote: fucksake i just played on all of these maps and PLEASE people actually fucking sit down and play them before complaining. i know its tough, but these maps actually played pretty damn well. the only one that seemed zerg unfriendly was the desert one, slag pits was so big and open, i just rolled over some guy. Desert one is god awful. It's impossible to expand, and there's so many abusable spots. Slag pits would be ok if it weren't so spawn dependent. It's like Metalopolis except the positional imbalances are even worse. The other two seem really good. | ||
|
holy_war
United States3590 Posts
| ||
|
SovSov
United States755 Posts
| ||
|
Umbrella
Taiwan936 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
They should have removed Delta if they were putting in the Gulch map. Haven't rolled it yet, but it looks like Delta Quadrant v. 2.0. Can you even spawn on the really close positions on Slag Pits? If you can that seems pretty stupid. But remember, everyone said the same thing about Shakuras, so there's chance you can't spawn that way. Shakuras set a precedent. Fixed LT? With only one watchtower so that stalemates aren't as common and aggression is rewarded in the midgame? And island expansions that might actually get taken and remain defensible? Fantastic! Overall I definitely like Typhon and the new Lost Temple. Gulch and Slag Pits I will have to play before judging. | ||
|
Keeler
United States313 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
I don't think there's any possible defense of it, especially when they're leaving/adding so many other terrible maps. | ||
|
andrewwiggin
Australia435 Posts
On February 26 2011 11:05 Miragee wrote: Seems like the bill is not about the refundation of 10 dollar but the payment of 10 dollars.... So you hated the map because you are awful, that's ok.  Still there is one good thing the most of us dismissed: Blizzard _changed_ the mappool. It seems that it won't be like in WC 3 (from what I heard). So it's a good first step and we can hope in the next one we will get good maps. It might suprise you, but not every player likes shakuras. And not because they're awful. Dumbass. | ||
|
Mommas Boy
Canada144 Posts
| ||
|
relyt
United States1073 Posts
| ||
|
Sauce.boss
Canada3 Posts
Terran imba map has been 'balanced' leaving a huge open area around the terran expo allowing zergs to baneling/ling MUCH easier is the terran tries to fast expand.. the removal of the 2 towers and turning them into one makes gameplay in TvT a little more interesting as holding the center leaves you really open to attack from (EVERYWHERE), I don't like the islands being removed as that once allowed for players who were behind to sneak expos and catch back up, now not a chance for that... Anybody have any thoughts on them other than 'yeah" or boo they removed shakuras (which was the best map) | ||
|
Comeh
United States18919 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 26 2011 11:25 andrewwiggin wrote: It might suprise you, but not every player likes shakuras. And not because they're awful. Dumbass. It's one thing to dislike them, but it's one of the more balanced maps. | ||
|
Galleon.frigate
Canada721 Posts
On February 26 2011 11:23 Jibba wrote: This is a hefty assumption, but the removal of Shakuras just indicates that Blizzard truly doesn't understand map design. They had a diamond in the rough out of a pool of many terrible maps, and they axe it? I don't think there's any possible defense of it, especially when they're leaving/adding so many other terrible maps. it's hard to disagree with this, I could understand making it a 2 player map if they felt that the terran push in 'close' position was to strong, still I was feeling that zergs were figuring how to deal with it (don't put all your tech in your main etc) I really wish I understood the logic. as a zerg I was all more happy close position shakuras than close position temple. | ||
|
Pax
United States175 Posts
On February 26 2011 11:33 Galleon.frigate wrote: it's hard to disagree with this, I could understand making it a 2 player map if they felt that the terran push in 'close' position was to strong, still I was feeling that zergs were figuring how to deal with it (don't put all your tech in your main etc) I really wish I understood the logic. as a zerg I was all more happy close position shakuras than close position temple. Yeah, and now new temple STILL has close spawns. | ||
|
Trentelshark
Canada385 Posts
1) If you spawn versus Zerg cross positions, it's way too easy to just run over their fast expansion 2) Securing a third if you're side-by-side is near impossible for any race 3) It's small with very few places to expand. If you like macro games you won't find it here In general on Slag, I seriously don't get what Blizzard was thinking. Remove this map and bring back Shakuras, I'm getting irritated with the gimicky small maps, and I can't fathom what made Blizzard consider this map for ladder. | ||
|
Klamity
United States994 Posts
| ||
| ||
