|
DO and Steppes of War were bad maps that needed to be removed. Shakuras was a great map, LT was a good map where the expansion just needed to be tweaked to be more open with no cliff harass and they improved that and then they unimproved the middle by changing the watch towers and making it way too open.
I don't have a comment yet about the 2 new maps but there is no way there should be 2 new maps along with a changed map that's too much change.
|
On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence.
One of these things is not like the other...
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/YRExh.jpg)
On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss.
|
I don't think slag pits is a very Marco map. I find it the smallest.rush distance is tiny and the expo is harder to defend than metal. The other maps are ok but I don't have anywhere to put my overlord.
|
On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss.
Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it.
|
On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it.
I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow...
Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how.
|
On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how.
rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true.
|
Just tell us how to defend your protoss expansion against Speedlings if you just have to "put effort into playing this game".....
The big choke takes 4 Forcefields to block, the "smaller" ones (yes, there are two of them) take 2 Forcefield to be blocked.
Btw: On Xel'Naga you just need 2 cannons+some buildings (including your Nexus) and every run-by is denied, On this map Protoss is going to need at least 4
And 4-Gate got greatly nerved, ever looked at the Zealot Building time?
|
On March 01 2011 04:42 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:35 flyguy wrote:
I actually am loving the new maps so far. Guess I haven't played them enough to realize how bad they are? Don't know, just keep playing. Don't listen to the massive thread of smoldering shit that says otherwise. If it works, do it ^_^
just cause you seem to fall into the minority in this thread, doesn't give you an excuse to disregard everyone else's opinions as 'smoldering shit' because they disagree. Most people have given pretty valid reasons for why they dislike the new maps, and saying everyone is 'just jumping on the bandwagon' is your attempt to de-legitimise everyone else's opinions for differing from yours. Grow up
|
On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true.
I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective.
Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration.
|
Russian Federation484 Posts
On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:
I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow...
You say effort is taking and overcoming all the cheesy shit being thrown at me(Z born-to-fast-expand), I say effort is economic and strategic decision making.
I saw no economic and strategic decision making in defending 5 rax reaper, 2rax, 3rax, blue hellions, thordrops, takndrops, cloak banshees, voidrays, double stargate phoenixes and fast DTs after I laid my hat first.
|
On March 01 2011 05:22 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true. I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective. Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration.
Well the 3k toss players you played supposedly must have been pretty terrible because if your third hatch isn't even going to your natural and waiting for your third already puts you super far behind lol
If you played actual good toss players who knew how to play pvz you would know why its so frusterating. Luckily on the NA server most don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz so that might be why you could also beat 3k masters which doesn't even mean your "good" anymore due to everyone being at 3500+.
|
On March 01 2011 05:20 Binabik wrote:
Just tell us how to defend your protoss expansion against Speedlings if you just have to "put effort into playing this game".....
The big choke takes 4 Forcefields to block, the "smaller" ones (yes, there are two of them) take 2 Forcefield to be blocked.
Btw: On Xel'Naga you just need 2 cannons+some buildings (including your Nexus) and every run-by is denied, On this map Protoss is going to need at least 4
And 4-Gate got greatly nerved, ever looked at the Zealot Building time?
I'd be surprised to find a zerg to take the time to break down both rocks on Gultch and then 2-base all-in you.
If you place buildings properly, you can probably deny one of the two rock-ed ramps. If you wall your main off with a zealot at the choke, you can probably deny access for a respectable amount of time. Failing this, you can probably put a zealot and a sentry, in case the single zealot wasn't enough to block the ramp off.
If you have your army positioned in front of your natural, you can respond to this threat in time since your zealot will hold or your forcefield will be there.
If the speedlings persist to try and get up that ramp, you can warp in more sentries. If they go toward your natural, you should have at least a sentry or two to cut his army in half at one of the two choke points. If he goes around the choke point, you should have already killed off at least some of his army before the other half gets to you. Furthermore, you can probably warp in some more shit, maybe sentries, to help you abuse terrain.
I already posted a solution to zerg aggression (HuK's 3 gate sentry open) You don't HAVE to pressure with his tactic if the zerg is ultra-aggressive. His aggressiveness essentially does the same damage your pressure would do to his economy had he did a macro build.
|
On March 01 2011 05:21 joshboy42 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:42 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:35 flyguy wrote:
I actually am loving the new maps so far. Guess I haven't played them enough to realize how bad they are? Don't know, just keep playing. Don't listen to the massive thread of smoldering shit that says otherwise. If it works, do it ^_^ just cause you seem to fall into the minority in this thread, doesn't give you an excuse to disregard everyone else's opinions as 'smoldering shit' because they disagree. Most people have given pretty valid reasons for why they dislike the new maps, and saying everyone is 'just jumping on the bandwagon' is your attempt to de-legitimise everyone else's opinions for differing from yours. Grow up
Actually, if you have read beyond that post, I have disregarded the invalid reasons for disliking the map with many valid points.
Jumping on the band wagon is the cherry on top for the group-think that has seems to stink around TL lately. Maybe its people like you who jump on the band wagon telling the minority to grow up just b/c they thought of something else. Maybe thats why we don't see that much innovation in game play around here.
Oh well. I for one enjoy not getting doom-dropped by zerg all that often or zealot bombed on my tanks or collosus harassed with a speed prism. Its just "one" less thing to deal with. Guess I can't wait to ladder tonight. 20 straight games of "QQ, them map forced me to all-in vs your heavily defended natural" /ragequit
|
On March 01 2011 04:47 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:42 Latedi wrote:On March 01 2011 04:35 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:31 Latedi wrote:On March 01 2011 04:26 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:18 Offhand wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. Shakuras is better then Xel'Naga for precisely this reason. This is one of the reasons they took out Shakuras. On Xel Naga, rushing is a VIABLE strategy. Macro is also a VIABLE strategy. Neither strategy is really more encouraged. In my experience, I have forge FE'd, 4 gated, 2 gate cannon rushed, forge cannon rushed, forge gate cannon rushed, 3 gate macroed, 3 gate mass expanded... 1 gate expanded... I had alot of options.. On Shakuras, it was an obvious choices to either 1 gate expand or forge FE vs zerg and terran. It was also obvious to 3 gate expand on Shakuras PvP since it was really easy to defend 4 gate mid-game given the 2nd ramp. Shakuras rush wasn't very viable since it was easy for the opponent to both defend AND macro (expand). Therefore, Shakuras was a bad map because it basically took out alot (I'd say more than half) of VIABLE alternatives to openings that were available on maps (such as xel naga) . The new maps haven't really told me what to expect yet. It might just be the case that a macro opening isn't viable, but I've yet to really determine that given that I am successful more than half the time with it. Even if I was only successful half the time (assuming I macroed and rushed half and half) macro option would still be viable. I haven't lost "most" my games macroing, therefore it isn't as one-base encouraged as other people say. This may be a bit off-topic, but just how would you 3gate expand on shakuras in PvP without dying to a 4gate? Well you open 1 gate... scout his 4 gate chrono-cheese... build 2 more gates.. a stalker.. a sentry.. maybe another sentry.. maybe another stalker .. a zealot maybe? then... maybe you build a robo... or something... (doesn't matter, up to you, i'd go for a robo, either way, you opened 3 gate) and then... now... you scout... if hes on the bottom of your ramp, dont move out. Maybe break your back rocks and expand backdoor if you have to. If he's gone.. take your natural, have enough sentries to cut him in half if he comes up the bigger ramp (2 forcefields needed per volley) and rape him if he comes up. You should have slighly less units, but because you cut his army in half you can defeat half his army and retreat. Really depends on the situation though. Maybe you get a dt and don't expand. Who knows. I just know that 4-gate is pretty much auto-loss on that map unless you really cheese the shit out of it. You also have to pull it off or your opponent has to fuck up. Sorry I thought you we're talking about doing some kind of FE with only 3gates -.-' Some random idea for expanding PvZ: screw the gas all together and spend the minerals on a larger simcity with a canon or two? Yup, totally off topic, but you can pretty much just forge nexus and cannon rush if he's too greedy. Maybe even just build a pylon if he didn't pool first. If he waited for hatch-first and you build a pylon at his expansion (look for hidden expo to cannon the fuck out of) it really injures his economy. Meanwhile, you have expanded and secured your natural with a cannon and proper gate forge pylon placement. Shakuras was bad for zerg in PvZ. This zerg once stopped my cannon rush (I built like 5 cannons and lost them all) only to lose to my 2-base macro ball. The natural (and backdoor third) were simply too easy to defend vs a very aggressive zerg. It wasn't really about the Voidray collosus ball. It was more about the fact that I could get there without any hardship of defending harassment. So if all these noob people in this thread get what they want. I'll just turtle 2-base death-ball every time vs zerg and zerg will always QQ/rage at me for having an imba race. Not really my fault that Blizzard made a map that allowed it I guess. But at least I'll have fun laughing at Idra blaming everything on the mechanics of a deathball.
Hehe canoning proxy expos makes me think about Brood War, had a lot of fun with that. Also what I am talking about for a forge fast expand is getting moostly more gateways instead of gas/cyber to make the wall larger. This would also give you more zealots than gas units which will further beat the crap out of speed lings. However roaches would just destroy this but I think it may be useful if large amounts of lings are scouted.
|
On March 01 2011 05:28 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:22 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true. I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective. Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration. Well the 3k toss players you played supposedly must have been pretty terrible because if your third hatch isn't even going to your natural and waiting for your third already puts you super far behind lol If you played actual good toss players who knew how to play pvz you would know why its so frusterating. Luckily on the NA server most don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz so that might be why you could also beat 3k masters which doesn't even mean your "good" anymore due to everyone being at 3500+.
Well, I've played less than 100 zerg games in my career as an SC2 player. I consider my 3k romping experience an achievement. As for my 2nd hatch not being by my natural. I don't exactly need it to be there early game since I don't start the game off with 40 drones to saturate both bases. Do you?
You are right.. .most people on the NA server don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz. That might also be why this thread is as long as it is since I don't see that many Korean's QQing on this page. Oh and I know Korean's do visit this page now and then. I also know that Korean's haven't really given that much feedback on the maps. Maybe we will find some feedback from them when the APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME HAS PASSED... you know.. when the dust settles and NA whiners stop QQing.
What is your rating by the way? Just curious. You must be above 3500+ since you consider yourself qualified to make such a condescending comment.
|
On March 01 2011 05:35 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:28 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:22 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true. I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective. Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration. Well the 3k toss players you played supposedly must have been pretty terrible because if your third hatch isn't even going to your natural and waiting for your third already puts you super far behind lol If you played actual good toss players who knew how to play pvz you would know why its so frusterating. Luckily on the NA server most don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz so that might be why you could also beat 3k masters which doesn't even mean your "good" anymore due to everyone being at 3500+. You are right.. .most people on the NA server don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz. That might also be why this thread is as long as it is since I don't see that many Korean's QQing on this page. Oh and I know Korean's do visit this page now and then. I also know that Korean's haven't really given that much feedback on the maps. Maybe we will find some feedback from them when the APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME HAS PASSED... you know.. when the dust settles and NA whiners stop QQing. Koreans not posting on an English speaking forum, shocking revelation that means maps are fine.
|
On March 01 2011 05:39 uSnAmplified wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:35 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:28 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:22 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true. I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective. Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration. Well the 3k toss players you played supposedly must have been pretty terrible because if your third hatch isn't even going to your natural and waiting for your third already puts you super far behind lol If you played actual good toss players who knew how to play pvz you would know why its so frusterating. Luckily on the NA server most don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz so that might be why you could also beat 3k masters which doesn't even mean your "good" anymore due to everyone being at 3500+. You are right.. .most people on the NA server don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz. That might also be why this thread is as long as it is since I don't see that many Korean's QQing on this page. Oh and I know Korean's do visit this page now and then. I also know that Korean's haven't really given that much feedback on the maps. Maybe we will find some feedback from them when the APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME HAS PASSED... you know.. when the dust settles and NA whiners stop QQing. Koreans not posting on an English speaking forum, shocking revelation that means maps are fine.
Here is a shocking revelation to you my American friend. Many people outside the United States speak English. Including a few Koreans who visit these forums. Also, there are many articles that are translated into English by our Korean friends. (Mainly the important articles). I'm sure we'll find one eventually.
Who said maps were fine? I just said its too early to tell.
EDIT: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2096558
Probably a good estimate that an even greater population of the younger population speak English. I couldn't find the exact numbers, nor did I want to find official census on the % of people that can speak English, but you can bet that at least half of those kimchi lovers speak English (meaning they are able to comment on here).
As for the % of people that know about this website, well.. given that TL is teamed up with one of the biggest Korean clans in Korea, I'd say anybody who's got a clue about SC2 in Korea has visited this site at least once.
|
On March 01 2011 05:35 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 05:28 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:22 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:18 blade55555 wrote:On March 01 2011 05:10 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 05:06 Sm3agol wrote:On March 01 2011 04:59 whatthefat wrote:On March 01 2011 03:47 Sm3agol wrote:
Why do people bash maps saying they have an undefendable nat......when arguably the most popular map is xe'lnaga.....which has the most open nat in existence. One of these things is not like the other... On Xel'naga, you can easily build static defense which covers both your expo and your ramp. Fast expanding is viable for protoss because you can simcity the ramp and expo easily. Same goes for Metalopolis. Similarly, zerg can connect creep, and actually use the expo's creep to defend the main ramp. On Backwater Gulch, you are effectively running and defending two completely independent bases. Good luck dealing with hellions as zerg, or roaches (or speedlings) as protoss. Rofl, I'm not going to lie, I didn't even notice that. But that's different from an "undefendable nat". That's not even a nat, lol. But also another awesome feature is the fact that you can siege up below the "nat" as well, and hit the expo. I seriously think cliffs need to go, period, but Blizzard seems to think they are an amazing gameplay feature, despite the fact that T is the only race that can really abuse it. I guess people just expect 2nd expansion bases to be spoon fed directly up their asses. Look at xel'naga.. the ramp directly points toward the natural... Oh God forbid, the 2nd map isn't as easy to defend. You mean you have to put effort into playing this game? Wow... Hard to expand does not mean automatic all-in. It means automatic all-in for noobs that don't know how to defend something thats harder to defend. I mean, people didn't really find a solution to 4-gate for the longest time, but Blizzard didn't really nerf it that much (or at all). I'm sure if you can find a solution to 4-gate, you'll get passed this some how. rofl might be fine for protoss but for zerg thats bad. that gulch map is a pain to play vs toss especially if they 4 gate due to the ramp being so far away from your natural and zerg needs to have that they can't stay one base that just does not work. Its a terrible map and I know you play protoss so that map does favor you so maybe thats why you don't understand but its terrible for zerg and dunno bout terran and no matter how hard to defend that its true you can deny it all you want but deep down you know its true. I accidentally smurfed my friend's account into masters league playing Zerg. I consistantly beat 3k Protoss players on both new and old maps. For Gultch I decided that maybe bulidling my 2nd hatcher at the big ramp and then a 3rd hatch at the natural was a safe macro opening. This allowed me to build spine crawlers at the ramp to defend against a 4 gate. The big ramp also gave me a big advantage vs 4-gate since forcefields were less effective. Just a thought. Zerg is pretty fun race btw... don't know why Idra much frustration. Well the 3k toss players you played supposedly must have been pretty terrible because if your third hatch isn't even going to your natural and waiting for your third already puts you super far behind lol If you played actual good toss players who knew how to play pvz you would know why its so frusterating. Luckily on the NA server most don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz so that might be why you could also beat 3k masters which doesn't even mean your "good" anymore due to everyone being at 3500+. Well, I've played less than 100 zerg games in my career as an SC2 player. I consider my 3k romping experience an achievement. As for my 2nd hatch not being by my natural. I don't exactly need it to be there early game since I don't start the game off with 40 drones to saturate both bases. Do you? You are right.. .most people on the NA server don't have a clue how to play toss in pvz. That might also be why this thread is as long as it is since I don't see that many Korean's QQing on this page. Oh and I know Korean's do visit this page now and then. I also know that Korean's haven't really given that much feedback on the maps. Maybe we will find some feedback from them when the APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME HAS PASSED... you know.. when the dust settles and NA whiners stop QQing. What is your rating by the way? Just curious. You must be above 3500+ since you consider yourself qualified to make such a condescending comment.
Exactly this. People just parrot that you need to stay an expansion above the protoss/terran player to be "even" because they heard some person say it once. The reason you need the additional hatchery is for production not for income. Like you said you can make the hatch at the ramp (or on other maps in the main) and then expand to your natural when safe, and you're still one base ahead and can keep up even production.
|
On March 01 2011 04:32 rS.Sinatra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:28 gray-fox wrote:On March 01 2011 04:14 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:06 Thallis wrote:On March 01 2011 03:55 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 03:50 Thallis wrote:On March 01 2011 03:34 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 03:19 Barca wrote:On March 01 2011 02:50 PJA wrote:On March 01 2011 01:17 trNimitz wrote:
One of the new maps is a horror PvZ. Who had the idea to make the nat expo a full screens length away from the ramp so that you can't expand at all vs speedlings... :S 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. 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. 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. 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). Why not bring Jinro into the discussion. The maps suck from a professional point of view. That alone tells you something. Its totally irrelevant whether the guy is terran or not. "hold the pressure and win the game".. we want long, even matches instead of a sealed victory after a zerg allin. I think the zerg chose to all-in.... are you saying the map has psychic powers making the zerg go allin?
Umm.. no. If the map encourages to go all-in, most of the zergs in the ladder will do that. And that is what most players do not want. What they want is a long macro game instead. However, if an all-in seems very valid way to win the game, most players do that, even if they like longer games more. I think you are just missing the point all the time here, and don't know what you are arguing against.
I dunno if these maps are really as bad pvz macro maps as people are saying though. Haven't tried them out myself yet.
|
On March 01 2011 05:49 gray-fox wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 04:32 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:28 gray-fox wrote:On March 01 2011 04:14 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 04:06 Thallis wrote:On March 01 2011 03:55 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 03:50 Thallis wrote:On March 01 2011 03:34 rS.Sinatra wrote:On March 01 2011 03:19 Barca wrote:On March 01 2011 02:50 PJA wrote:
[quote]
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. 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. 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. 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). Why not bring Jinro into the discussion. The maps suck from a professional point of view. That alone tells you something. Its totally irrelevant whether the guy is terran or not. "hold the pressure and win the game".. we want long, even matches instead of a sealed victory after a zerg allin. I think the zerg chose to all-in.... are you saying the map has psychic powers making the zerg go allin? Umm.. no. If the map encourages to go all-in, most of the zergs in the ladder will do that. And that is what most players do not want. What they want is a long macro game instead. However, if an all-in seems very valid way to win the game, most players do that, even if they like longer games more. I think you are just missing the point all the time here, and don't know what you are arguing against. I dunno if these maps are really as bad pvz macro maps as people are saying though. Haven't tried them out myself yet.
Haha... so you haven't even tried the maps out, but you are here saying that the maps encourage allins?
good job, you just proved my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
