EPTNew Maps in 1v1 Pool - Page 61
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BlasiuS
United States2405 Posts
| ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On February 27 2011 18:43 sluggaslamoo wrote: Whether it is balanced or not is not the issue. Its the gameplay that happens as a result of these maps. You only have to take one glance at maps to realise that games will or won't be won as a result of tanks drops, 2 port banshee, 1 base all ins, or other builds that produces overly one sided skill-less rock-paper-scissor games. Blizzard complains about the 2 rax all in, yet they make ridiculous maps like these. Well I used to 1 or 2 rax FE every game against Zerg. Now its actually impossible, you just can't do it. So the only alternative is cheesy 1 base play, because as soon as you expand and move out you will get a run by of lings and banelings and lose. It happened twice in a row, and as a result I've given up on laddering. I can't stand having to do 1 base all ins vs 1 base all in every game. Xel Naga was pretty bad for walling, but its sim city heaven when you compare it to these maps. You can't wall off a natural that has 3 entrances, and wide open front, and the main ramp being kilometers away. Which means against any decent player who has their priorities right, just has to wait for you to move out, then run by with a ton of speedlings and kill all your scvs. Think of it this way, rock-paper-scissors is perfectly balanced. Does it produce fair games? No. The worst part is the balance may improve between races, and Blizzard will think they have achieved a eureka moment. Actually, balanced or not is the only issue. Resulting game play is decided upon each player's approach to the particular match. You can't expect macro games coming from Terrans doing some sort of 1-base all-ins vs zergs. No matter what the map is, it will most likely end short. If you want a more macro oriented game, nerf the one-base allin across the board. You seem to think that walling off is something a Terran ought to be able to do. Well, sorry, that is simply not the case. There are situations where walling off can be strategic and those situations that do not reward such behavior. Simply expecting maps be made to cater to Terran walls is out of the question. You should consider yourself lucky that your supply depots lower into the ground in the first place. Protoss don't have the luxury of temporary walls. They have to blow up their own buildings to make a path (costs money). So to complain about new maps simply b/c they are terrible at walling off is pretty much a QQ complaint. Complaining that maps are too small / uneasy to hit a macro game isn't a valid complaint. Can't make every single map the size of Garden of Aiur (brood war reference) to avoid rush games, thats not the problem. | ||
|
Kaleidos
Italy172 Posts
This statement from Blizzy: "(4) Slag Pits Metalopolis was one of two favorite maps across the different skill levels of players. We decided to introduce a very similar map, but slightly more macro heavy. We took out Shakuras Plateau, which was a very plain macro map, and added this map instead." ..made me actually realize that: In close spawn there is one less path until midgame. The gold bases are on the sides and easier to defend compared to Metalopolis In close position Terran/Protoss don't have that high ground expo so easy to turtle in. About takin a third as P & T, in close position is same as Metalopolis, in cross you may take down the rocks and expo in the next natural ..that is closer then on Meta. As Zerg you have a spotter location that can just help ..not much ..but Meta doesn't have it. ..the Tank glitch to hit the main base is ofc bad.. bud i don't think was meant to be like that. So why don't actually give it a try? | ||
|
Barca
United States418 Posts
On March 01 2011 02:50 PJA wrote: If you are struggling PvZ on Backwater Gulch you really shouldn't be complaining about balance of maps imo. It's a bad PvZ macro map. For the Protoss, it's hard to wall off, it's hard to expand, and the Zerg gets a gold expo as their third base. I'm sure it's a great map for 1 base PvZ all-ins. | ||
|
PineappleSage
Canada109 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:01 BlasiuS wrote: Excuse me for not reading the entire thread, but I've found that ZvP on Shattered Temple basically gives protoss a free 3rd. the corner expo is so far away it's incredibly hard to stop. Does anyone have any tips on pressuring toss' 3rd on this map? I think muta's can controll the map so well that toss cant get that many basses till muta's become not as powerful later when toss gets a big ball of units. The map i think has lots of space behind so u can go back and forth between nat and 3rd. also because of the tiny ramp to nat=>3rd it takes time to jump back and forth or... maybe kill the 2nd rocks for more attack paths early before he gets a army on the high ground or... because he is being so campy eco up and think the standered not 2 bass toss vs3 bass zerg but 4-5 bass zerg vs a 3 bass toss not tested i did not try this but looking at the map there is i think a nice spot for ovies with full banlings from the 3rds side that is farther from the main to do a nice bling bomb. infestors from gold using infested terrans to the 3rd on another note dose anyone have new overlord scout paths? ps: i am only a plat player so sorry if my thoughts sound nooby ^>^ yaaaa for larger maps | ||
|
chuDr3t4
Russian Federation484 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:11 rS.Sinatra wrote:Actually, balanced or not is the only issue. Resulting game play is decided upon each player's approach to the particular match. You can't expect macro games coming from Terrans doing some sort of 1-base all-ins vs zergs. No matter what the map is, it will most likely end short. If you want a more macro oriented game, nerf the one-base allin across the board This. Fucking this. It boiled my blood to read Blizzard using term 'rushmap' in their article about wtf are they doing. If both players decide to macro up and split the map they probably would have a nice long game on Blood Bath. I played BW TvZ with  9 Pool (vs Terran) on every map and my games were of 7 minutes long on Fighting Spirit, Heartbreak Ridge, Luna and Chupung-Ryeong. All games were same. But if I want to play macro game and map favours rushing by design and punishes expanding, and that is fucking 80% of this damned ladder pool, this simply pisses me off and effectively this stopped me from laddering. Ideal map should be neutral to both macroing and rushing, players need to make decisions about what kind of game they should play. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:19 Barca wrote: It's a bad PvZ macro map. For the Protoss, it's hard to wall off, it's hard to expand, and the Zerg gets a gold expo as their third base. I'm sure it's a great map for 1 base PvZ all-ins. Its not bad at all... on a map like Xel Naga, there actually is no ramp... your natural is wide open, save the destructible rocks on the path to the third. Maybe try a different building placement style or a different style of expansion. For example, you can semi-wall with zealot block on your main and then have your main army on/near the ramp / near your expo... doing this will do two things.. 1) it creates essentially a double barrier between speedlings and your base and 2) it protects your expansion by having your army up front. This is weaker if zerg has tons of mutalisks, but ask yourself, would having a closer ramp really help you in that situation? This is also weaker if zerg drops you, but ask yourself, if you were unprepared for a drop in any situation, would having a closer ramp to your NATURAL really have helped you? also, how often to zergs actually doom-drop.... (zergs are pretty uninnovative these days) So before you start complaining about the maps being bad simply b/c they aren't your beloved GSL maps, maybe take the time to find out the real problem (shortcut: the problem is you, you are the problem, refer to numerous threads on walling off/sim city/strategic placement/day9 on how to improve yourself). This thread is complete garbage. I wish it didn't exist. But since there are tons of people spewing their garbage and because blizzard actually listens, I feel it is important to repeat that it is way too early to actually criticize maps. Pretty much most people in this thread became "group-think" sheep that would bitch at ANY MAP no matter how awesome it is, if it isn't a GSL map that we see on TV. Get a grip. Maybe a month or two from now, I'll be like.. "oh hey, this map is fucking imba due to this *insert strategy yet to be seen* that totally favours *x race vs y race*" but even then, I probably overlooked a solution against such a strategy myself. So instead of thumbing the "YES vs NO" hate on the maps, maybe try spending some time to learn the maps before you spew all your BS about map imbalance and non-macro orientation because of not being able to wall off on certain maps. P.S. Blizzard: I hope the 400 or so people that actually voted the YES/NO are not portrayed as an accurate representation of the million+ people that play this game. Aka, poll is useless. | ||
|
Barca
United States418 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:34 rS.Sinatra wrote: Its not bad at all... on a map like Xel Naga, there actually is no ramp... your natural is wide open, save the destructible rocks on the path to the third. Maybe try a different building placement style or a different style of expansion. For example, you can semi-wall with zealot block on your main and then have your main army on/near the ramp / near your expo... doing this will do two things.. 1) it creates essentially a double barrier between speedlings and your base and 2) it protects your expansion by having your army up front. This is weaker if zerg has tons of mutalisks, but ask yourself, would having a closer ramp really help you in that situation? This is also weaker if zerg drops you, but ask yourself, if you were unprepared for a drop in any situation, would having a closer ramp to your NATURAL really have helped you? also, how often to zergs actually doom-drop.... (zergs are pretty uninnovative these days) So before you start complaining about the maps being bad simply b/c they aren't your beloved GSL maps, maybe take the time to find out the real problem (shortcut: the problem is you, you are the problem, refer to numerous threads on walling off/sim city/strategic placement/day9 on how to improve yourself). This thread is complete garbage. I wish it didn't exist. But since there are tons of people spewing their garbage and because blizzard actually listens, I feel it is important to repeat that it is way too early to actually criticize maps. Pretty much most people in this thread became "group-think" sheep that would bitch at ANY MAP no matter how awesome it is, if it isn't a GSL map that we see on TV. Get a grip. Maybe a month or two from now, I'll be like.. "oh hey, this map is fucking imba due to this *insert strategy yet to be seen* that totally favours *x race vs y race*" but even then, I probably overlooked a solution against such a strategy myself. So instead of thumbing the "YES vs NO" hate on the maps, maybe try spending some time to learn the maps before you spew all your BS about map imbalance and non-macro orientation because of not being able to wall off on certain maps. Um, yeah I'm pretty sure Xel'naga is a bad map for walling off too, and comparing it to Backwater Gulch the third gold is less dependable and has destructible rocks. And thank you for the advice to watch Day9 and learn to wall off, I'm sure that you are correct in your assumption that I actually suck and have no idea how to play this game rather than taking my opinion seriously. Please contribute positively to the thread next time and stop trolling. | ||
|
gnutz
Germany666 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:34 rS.Sinatra wrote: Its not bad at all... on a map like Xel Naga, there actually is no ramp... your natural is wide open, save the destructible rocks on the path to the third. Maybe try a different building placement style or a different style of expansion. For example, you can semi-wall with zealot block on your main and then have your main army on/near the ramp / near your expo... doing this will do two things.. 1) it creates essentially a double barrier between speedlings and your base and 2) it protects your expansion by having your army up front. This is weaker if zerg has tons of mutalisks, but ask yourself, would having a closer ramp really help you in that situation? This is also weaker if zerg drops you, but ask yourself, if you were unprepared for a drop in any situation, would having a closer ramp to your NATURAL really have helped you? also, how often to zergs actually doom-drop.... (zergs are pretty uninnovative these days) So before you start complaining about the maps being bad simply b/c they aren't your beloved GSL maps, maybe take the time to find out the real problem (shortcut: the problem is you, you are the problem, refer to numerous threads on walling off/sim city/strategic placement/day9 on how to improve yourself). This thread is complete garbage. I wish it didn't exist. But since there are tons of people spewing their garbage and because blizzard actually listens, I feel it is important to repeat that it is way too early to actually criticize maps. Pretty much most people in this thread became "group-think" sheep that would bitch at ANY MAP no matter how awesome it is, if it isn't a GSL map that we see on TV. Get a grip. Maybe a month or two from now, I'll be like.. "oh hey, this map is fucking imba due to this *insert strategy yet to be seen* that totally favours *x race vs y race*" but even then, I probably overlooked a solution against such a strategy myself. So instead of thumbing the "YES vs NO" hate on the maps, maybe try spending some time to learn the maps before you spew all your BS about map imbalance and non-macro orientation because of not being able to wall off on certain maps. P.S. Blizzard: I hope the 400 or so people that actually voted the YES/NO are not portrayed as an accurate representation of the million+ people that play this game. Aka, poll is useless. Before you talk more, please look at this http://www.justin.tv/rootcatz/b/280414222. These are Pros and explain their thoughts really good. + Show Spoiler + They actually say the same as the most people in this thread. They say all these maps are bad and Zerg favored. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:39 Barca wrote: Um, yeah I'm pretty sure Xel'naga is a bad map for walling off too, and comparing it to Backwater Gulch the third gold is less dependable and has destructible rocks. And thank you for the advice to watch Day9 and learn to wall off, I'm sure that you are correct in your assumption that I actually suck and have no idea how to play this game rather than taking my opinion seriously. Please contribute positively to the thread next time and stop trolling. Actually, I provided numerous helpful solutions to you. I'm not going to name every strategic play that would prevent you from expanding if walling off your entire ramp is not an option. P-sure you are just offended and are calling me a troll to defend yourself. I'm just saying that your argument about non-wall off ramp = map bad is false. Supporting my argument with facts, etc. One might say that you are the troll since you actually haven't provided any positive contribution since your "contribution" is basically : can't wall off.. QQ.. map sucks... map sucks because can't wall off... more QQ.. he's a troll etc Think about other strategies, since walling off is not your only option. PS: you came to the conclusion that you were a bad player that didn't know what you were talking about yourself. i didn't say any such thing. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:42 gnutz wrote: Before you talk more, please look at this http://www.justin.tv/rootcatz/b/280414222. These are Pros and explain their thoughts really good. + Show Spoiler + They actually say the same as the most people in this thread. They say all these maps are bad and Zerg favored. What makes someone a Pro? I play in the same leagues as EG and ROOT and FNatic MSI for clan rS. We've defeated all 3 teams in the past (and have been defeated by them). I'm pretty sure some of the people from those clans are making their voice heard. Therefore maybe they should read my thread before they make a video? You make no sense.... wait, who should look to who for suggestions before commenting? Did everyone in this thread refer to the opinions of Slayers_Boxer before coming here or something? If so, sorry, I must have missed the party. EDIT: the fact is, most of these "pros" (btw.. pro means paid to play, salaried, waged, not earned money in the past) know just about as much about the maps as anybody else here. They simply haven't logged enough hours to find out the possibilities. I'm not sure if you are familiar of the game of Chess, but it took quite a few years before black and white mastered every thinkable strategy on the chessboard (the chessboard is a sort of map). If you think that you can bust out a short video simply b/c you are "pro" after 3 days of playing on a map, I think you are a bit short sighted and jumping to conclusions. I'm willing to give the new maps a try before I start bashing the shit out of them (which I may eventually do, but not yet). | ||
|
Sm3agol
United States2055 Posts
| ||
|
Thallis
United States314 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:34 rS.Sinatra wrote: Its not bad at all... on a map like Xel Naga, there actually is no ramp... your natural is wide open, save the destructible rocks on the path to the third. Maybe try a different building placement style or a different style of expansion. For example, you can semi-wall with zealot block on your main and then have your main army on/near the ramp / near your expo... doing this will do two things.. 1) it creates essentially a double barrier between speedlings and your base and 2) it protects your expansion by having your army up front. This is weaker if zerg has tons of mutalisks, but ask yourself, would having a closer ramp really help you in that situation? This is also weaker if zerg drops you, but ask yourself, if you were unprepared for a drop in any situation, would having a closer ramp to your NATURAL really have helped you? also, how often to zergs actually doom-drop.... (zergs are pretty uninnovative these days) So before you start complaining about the maps being bad simply b/c they aren't your beloved GSL maps, maybe take the time to find out the real problem (shortcut: the problem is you, you are the problem, refer to numerous threads on walling off/sim city/strategic placement/day9 on how to improve yourself). This thread is complete garbage. I wish it didn't exist. But since there are tons of people spewing their garbage and because blizzard actually listens, I feel it is important to repeat that it is way too early to actually criticize maps. Pretty much most people in this thread became "group-think" sheep that would bitch at ANY MAP no matter how awesome it is, if it isn't a GSL map that we see on TV. Get a grip. Maybe a month or two from now, I'll be like.. "oh hey, this map is fucking imba due to this *insert strategy yet to be seen* that totally favours *x race vs y race*" but even then, I probably overlooked a solution against such a strategy myself. So instead of thumbing the "YES vs NO" hate on the maps, maybe try spending some time to learn the maps before you spew all your BS about map imbalance and non-macro orientation because of not being able to wall off on certain maps. P.S. Blizzard: I hope the 400 or so people that actually voted the YES/NO are not portrayed as an accurate representation of the million+ people that play this game. Aka, poll is useless. There are plenty of explanations in the thread as to why these maps are terrible, especially when you consider the reasoning behind them. The Ramp on Gulch is retarded and the split nat makes it incredibly difficult to stop a 4gate. Slag pits has a retarded rush distance from close positions, the natural is stupidly far from the ramp, and siege tanks can hit the mineral line from a position outside the base. Typhon's natural is retardedly open. Even Jinro posted in this thread and agrees that these maps are awful. It may be very little time since being added, but it's painfully obvious that the maps are imbalanced and encourage one base all ins. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:50 Thallis wrote: There are plenty of explanations in the thread as to why these maps are terrible, especially when you consider the reasoning behind them. The Ramp on Gulch is retarded and the split nat makes it incredibly difficult to stop a 4gate. Slag pits has a retarded rush distance from close positions, the natural is stupidly far from the ramp, and siege tanks can hit the mineral line from a position outside the base. Typhon's natural is retardedly open. Even Jinro posted in this thread and agrees that these maps are awful. It may be very little time since being added, but it's painfully obvious that the maps are imbalanced and encourage one base all ins. Oh I'm sorry, the mighty Chinro posted about this in the thread? I guess we better just shut the shit down and stop the discussion altogether. Since God has spoken, no more shall be said. How about coming up with your own arguments instead of piggy-backing off other people's. Yes, true, the tank thing on Slag is awful, but at the same time I remember someone saying that it was a very zerg favored map. Why the sudden change that it is now Terran favored? Also, how does siege tank hitting main-mineral line equate to encouraging one-base allins? Typhon's natural "retardedly" open you say?! OH NOES, maybe you should put some structures there to minimize the surface area like you do on Metalopolis or Xel Naga or Delta Quadrant or Kulas Ravine or Desert Oasis... Whoever came up with the Tank hitting mineral line pretty much has the right idea. Instead of QQing about his supply depots being too small to wall off a 10 pixel ramp, he found a way to beat zerg on this "heavily zerg favored map" (refer to various pros saying so, it must be true then). I also recall building a factory to be somewhat mid-early-game. Therefore, maybe it isn't as one-base all in as you could argue. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:01 BlasiuS wrote: Excuse me for not reading the entire thread, but I've found that ZvP on Shattered Temple basically gives protoss a free 3rd. the corner expo is so far away it's incredibly hard to stop. Does anyone have any tips on pressuring toss' 3rd on this map? I went for the opposite approach. I haven't really played the map enough to say if this will work in the long run but basically the middle is death for a P army. So I mass expanded when he tried to get a third. I don't see an effective way of pressuring the third. Just too many points of FF. | ||
|
Thallis
United States314 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:55 rS.Sinatra wrote: Oh I'm sorry, the mighty Chinro posted about this in the thread? I guess we better just shut the shit down and stop the discussion altogether. Since God has spoken, no more shall be said. How about coming up with your own arguments instead of piggy-backing off other people's. Yes, true, the tank thing on Slag is awful, but at the same time I remember someone saying that it was a very zerg favored map. Why the sudden change that it is now Terran favored? Also, how does siege tank hitting main-mineral line equate to encouraging one-base allins? Typhon's natural "retardedly" open you say?! OH NOES, maybe you should put some structures there to minimize the surface area like you do on Metalopolis or Xel Naga or Delta Quadrant or Kulas Ravine or Desert Oasis... You act like I don't already. The problem with it is any form of two basing just gets destroyed from zerg pressure because force fields are completely ineffective with a natural that wide. It's not hard to see why it encourages all in play. Because your naturals are so difficult to defend, or siegeing the mineral line is possible, it encourages you to try to end the game before hand. The angry assumptions that I didn't come to any of these conclusions by myself are completely off base, considering I've played my fair share on these maps, as well as have had long discussions with my friends (all diamond - top 200 players) about these maps. You assume that people don't like the maps because they're blizzard maps as opposed to the features which we have talked about. Btw I'm Protoss, so i have no idea about the balance of ZvT and therefore haven't spoken about it. | ||
|
joshboy42
Australia116 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:00 mucker wrote: Really getting to be baffling. Browder said in a interview recently that he watches the GSL vods every morning when he works out. Does he really watch those awesome Shakuras games and think well this is definitely NOT what we want players to experience on the ladder? Not enough worker allins or one base attacks timed around a low level upgrade on the new non-Blizzard maps for them? Meanwhile they're tweaking templar, infestors and battlecruisers on the PTR... how are we even supposed to test changes to those units with a ladder pool we can't safely hold our natural on? dont worry, they didn't even give us the new maps on PTR, even though they're already live on the main servers | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On March 01 2011 04:06 Thallis wrote: You act like I don't already. The problem with it is any form of two basing just gets destroyed from zerg pressure because force fields are completely ineffective with a natural that wide. It's not hard to see why it encourages all in play. Because your naturals are so difficult to defend, or siegeing the mineral line is possible, it encourages you to try to end the game before hand. The angry assumptions that I didn't come to any of these conclusions by myself are completely off base, considering I've played my fair share on these maps, as well as have had long discussions with my friends (all diamond - top 200 players) about these maps. You assume that people don't like the maps because they're blizzard maps as opposed to the features which we have talked about. Btw I'm Protoss, so i have no idea about the balance of ZvT and therefore haven't spoken about it. Oh, you are Protoss. I, am also Protoss. I felt that you knew about some ZvT balance since you brought Jinro (a terran player btw) into the discussion. Since you have just admitted to basically not knowing dick-shit about Terran, at least not TvT or TvZ, maybe don't bring in a professional Terran player in the discussion. So you are Protoss and you are having trouble with zerg pressure. 1) Zerg pressure means less zerg macro. Hold the pressure and you out-macro the zerg 2) Proper building placement and unit selection holds off zerg pressure. Since the map isn't actually as bad as you say it is (ie, its not a completely open map with flank options from every single direction) there are actually places and small nooks in the map where you can gain a small advantage from fighting at. 3) If zerg is using heavy aggression, you are ahead if you win. You lose obviously if you don't hold it. (See 1) That being said, after holding it, you are solidifying a victory by taking a 2nd/3rd after heavy aggression (provided you didn't cripple yourself in an attempt to hold it off). HuK's 3 gate into 5 gate mass sentry build really helps you in situations where terrain is not favourable. This is the reason why HuK can march across vast distances (that aren't protected by giant cliffs or walls or choke points) across maps like Xel Naga or Scrap Station or Shakuras with his 10 sentries and 3 zealot army (give or take a few sentries or zealots) straight to the zerg natural and apply pressure. His abundant amount of forcefields allows him to change the terrain to his liking, forcing the zerg to fight at a disadvantage. This is only ONE solution of many. | ||
|
Latedi
Sweden1027 Posts
I also believe it might be time to trash a few old strategies for expanding etc on the new maps and come up with new ones. 1basing is of course going to be more favored on maps like like Slag Pits but then you just have to come up with new ways of expanding. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On March 01 2011 03:42 gnutz wrote: Before you talk more, please look at this http://www.justin.tv/rootcatz/b/280414222. These are Pros and explain their thoughts really good. + Show Spoiler + They actually say the same as the most people in this thread. They say all these maps are bad and Zerg favored. Actually that's not what they say. I listened to the whole podcast as it aired. They thought the maps encouraged 4gate from P (which kinda sucks, yeah) and hated Gulch. Slag Pits they enjoyed as Zerg players. Shattered Temple they also enjoyed and thought it fixed most of the problems with LT (though at the cost of making the Watchtower useless in close spawns). Typhon they were divided on. | ||
| ||
