EPTMLG 2011 map pool announced - Page 13
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Umbrella
Taiwan936 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On March 01 2011 17:28 ScaringKids wrote: This. Every major tournament should agree on the same map pool, and have things like prevent close spaw on certain maps. This is awsome, very glad to see MLG going in the right direction, great maps. Disagree completely, that takes the fun out of it. Even BW MSL vs OSL had different map pools they went through, added a variety. Also, it prevents one race from completely dominating the scene if the map pool ends up being biased in some way. While MSL might have heavy Zerg biased maps, OSL might be using maps that are Zerg neutral or even disadvantageous. Also, the more maps we have, the more unique strats we'll see. While it sounds unideal, progamers will be able to abuse the fact that other progamers haven't seen certain strategies on that map yet, so watching the execution of them becomes awesome. When it's a map that's used over and over again, once that strat is used once, it's usually fleshed out and might be a "one-time gimmick." In short, it promotes innovative play. People like seeing new cheeses (or even just strategies), just not the old repetitive ones that are used over and over again like 4gates. | ||
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:06 Motiva wrote: wow MLG delivers :D I can't wait for this season. neither, esp with idra, and even maybe grubby, along with all the other big western names attending, and with the great maps now. tbh i find MLG as interesting as GSL. while GSL has the best players in the world, i feel more of a connection to the western players, esp the members of liquid and eG | ||
|
Pondo
Australia283 Posts
| ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
Wolf
Korea (South)3290 Posts
| ||
yamato77
11589 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:12 Pondo wrote: Good job to MLG forcing the changes Blizzard should have done ages ago. Blizzard has stated, multiple times, that tournaments should use their own map pool. As far as MLG's choices go, they seem pretty good. Obviously, having every game in a 256+ person tournament last 45 minutes would be bad, and this is why the largest GSL/iCCup maps were not included, but the games should be long and entertaining nonetheless. Can't wait to see the map pool in action on April Fool's! I'm definitely making the trip to downtown Dallas for this one. | ||
|
Poocs
94 Posts
| ||
|
joshboy42
Australia116 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:05 Poocs wrote: I think it's ridiculous to force macro games. Takes away from the variety of strategies used. But I guess the community just wants to see 50 minutes games instead of cool builds. yep you're totally right. every game thats not a 5-10min all-in rush is a 50minute macro game with both players sitting in their bases twiddling their thumbs | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:15 Wolf wrote: I think the "walling bullshit" is part of the game and easily prevented by a patrolling worker. -_- Even Jinro, a really good Terran who has used the bottom-of-ramp bunker wall-in, said that it's practically a free win 33% of the time. Anything to take that random crap out of the game is a good choice in my, and many other's opinions. The GSL has done this, and now MLG is following suit. Even Blizzard thought the pylon wall-in was too strong and nerfed it. I don't think many people want to watch, or even play, games that can be won with such a mindlessly executable strat. | ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
Major props. | ||
|
Alexj
Ukraine440 Posts
I don't like SS and Shattered Temple as a protoss. Even CatZ said on his stream that the middle for Shattered Temple is too open, and SS is just bad for protoss | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
At first I was really disappointed that Crossfire is in, cause I think it's a retarded map for Zerg with all these chokes. But then again, the rest of the map pool is really nice for Zerg, so that kinda balances it out. imo Crossfire and Scrap Station are the weak maps (maybe new LT too), hopefully MLG will remove those later this year. A map like Terminus Re or iCCup Braxis Orbital would be a great addition then. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:15 Wolf wrote: I think the "walling bullshit" is part of the game and easily prevented by a patrolling worker. -_- Not necessarily, I've seen plenty of times they come in with 2 scvs at once, and before the Z can pull additional workers the drone is forced to either move or die. Patrolling should stop it, but no it doesn't auto prevent it, especially if the ramp is a decent distance from the min line. It's stupid to let it happen, it's not even fun to watch, and it's not a strat you even have to really plan out but rather "oh, I might as well do this." | ||
|
Turgid
United States1623 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: yep you're totally right. every game thats not a 5-10min all-in rush is a 50minute macro game with both players sitting in their bases twiddling their thumbs It's impossible to have a macro game when you're just sitting in your base anyway. Macro games are about trying to secure an economic advantage. | ||
|
Slon20
Netherlands206 Posts
But great map pool! | ||
|
rift
1819 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: yep you're totally right. every game thats not a 5-10min all-in rush is a 50minute macro game with both players sitting in their bases twiddling their thumbs The funny thing is that new players think a "macro game" is something unique or out of the norm in SC. In Brood War most games were macro because it was not a game of all-ins on tiny, simplified Blizzard maps. This is how the game is meant to be. Every map should be removed and replaced with these Korean maps or iCCup maps of similar size. Most games I saw in the invitational with Startale were still all-ins because the iCCup map size generally mirrors Blizzard's; it was what we were raised on, and it needs to be eliminated from competitive play. BW games take a while to build up; SC2 players need to have some patience in watching. On the ladder situation: tournaments changing to only-custom maps is the best initiative the competitive community can take to convince Blizzard to add them to the map pool. | ||
|
Mercadia
United States257 Posts
On March 01 2011 18:22 yamato77 wrote: Even Jinro, a really good Terran who has used the bottom-of-ramp bunker wall-in, said that it's practically a free win 33% of the time. Anything to take that random crap out of the game is a good choice in my, and many other's opinions. The GSL has done this, and now MLG is following suit. Even Blizzard thought the pylon wall-in was too strong and nerfed it. I don't think many people want to watch, or even play, games that can be won with such a mindlessly executable strat. It's a free win IF zerg allows it. Not hard to patrol a drone at the ramp and float an overlord over a hatch to see bunker rushes coming. Bad change imo. Options keep getting reduced in matchups, kinda making the game dull. I actually never fear cheese from a T. And yes, that's bad. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote: The funny thing is that new players think a "macro game" is something unique or out of the norm in SC. In Brood War most games were macro because it was not a game of all-ins on tiny, simplified Blizzard maps. This is how the game is meant to be. Every map should be removed and replaced with these Korean maps or iCCup maps of similar size. Most games I saw in the invitational with Startale were still all-ins because the iCCup map size generally mirrors Blizzard's; it was what we were raised on, and it needs to be eliminated from competitive play. BW games take a while to build up; SC2 players need to have some patience in watching. On the ladder situation: tournaments changing to only-custom maps is the best initiative the competitive community can take to convince Blizzard to add them to the map pool. Well I'm pretty sure the person you quoted was being sarcastic. | ||
|
rift
1819 Posts
On March 01 2011 19:29 FabledIntegral wrote: Well I'm pretty sure the person you quoted was being sarcastic. Yah, I was responding to the person he quoted. | ||
| ||
