|
On March 01 2011 19:36 rift wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:29 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Yah, I was responding to the person he quoted.
Oh. Kinda confusing^.
|
On March 01 2011 08:46 Asha` wrote:
Key notes are the decisions to prevent close spawns on Meta and Shattered Temple, as well as forcing Shakuras to be cross pos only.
Wish Blizzard would implement this..
|
What's with all these shitty building blockers? Seriously , it's a part of the game as cheese is a part of the game.And no close spawn? What the hell? Also part of the damn game.
|
On March 01 2011 19:50 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
What's with all these shitty building blockers? Seriously , it's a part of the game as cheese is a part of the game.And no close spawn? What the hell? Also part of the damn game.
Yeah people are acting like the game is somehow imperfect or could use improvement, it's insane. Be ashamed of yourselves.
|
On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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.
Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way.
|
On March 01 2011 19:54 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way.
The tournament hosts can....... choose the maps used in the tournament, though. Go play Blood bath in customs for micro emphasis.
|
I think it's pretty rare to see more/more interesting/more emphasized micro in rush games as opposed to macro games. In cheese/rush/timing push games, usually the deciding factor is whether or not the rushed player happened to make the one bad choice that will kill them or not kill them. In close positions they often have to make that choice blind. Sometimes it's their build order. Sometimes it's making two too many drones.
|
On March 01 2011 19:57 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:54 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way. The tournament hosts can....... choose the maps used in the tournament, though. Go play Blood bath in customs for micro emphasis.
Oh yeah you made some nice points there. Really constructive.I don't wanna play a shitty custom map. I wanna play normal Starcraft 2 and I want MLG to allow players to play however they want and not make preposterous restrictions to please QQing zergs.
|
really nice balanced maps 
|
On March 01 2011 20:00 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:57 Shikyo wrote:On March 01 2011 19:54 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way. The tournament hosts can....... choose the maps used in the tournament, though. Go play Blood bath in customs for micro emphasis. Oh yeah you made some nice points there. Really constructive.I don't wanna play a shitty custom map. I wanna play normal Starcraft 2 and I want MLG to allow players to play however they want and not make preposterous restrictions to please QQing zergs.
I feel like I'm a serial responder here but close positions definitely don't let people play how they want no matter what the matchup is.
|
I feel like making Shakuras only cross positions makes it even more boring. It's essentially just 2 bases with easily defendable naturals seperated by a huge open expanse. Dull.
|
On March 01 2011 19:54 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way.
No it's meant to be whatever the community shapes it into. Just because the game was firm in Blizzards hand with the ladder maps doesn't mean the community or tournaments have to give even two cents about it. What some people really seem to not get is that these "macro" maps change the flow of the game, not the duration. New aggressive expanding leads to totally different timings (upgrades, army, attack patterns).
If you sit in your base for 50 minutes without anything happening it's safe to say that both you and your opponent don't understand the game.
|
On March 01 2011 19:54 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2011 19:24 rift wrote:On March 01 2011 18:19 joshboy42 wrote: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 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. Meant to be? It's Blizzard's damn game , and it's meant to be whatever the hell they wish it to be. I'm actually really glad to see close spawn games, more emphasis on the micro aspect of the game and really fun to watch. The game should be diverse, you shouldn't be forced by the damn tournament hosts to play in a certain way.
close positions promotes games decided more by luck than skill, as many times you have to blind counter your opponent and can lose on build orders. plus the games are generally shorter and not as exciting, either to play or spectate. its not like its impossible to do any early aggression in the other spawn locations on metal or LT, but it allows more ways to play the game
|
On March 01 2011 20:07 The KY wrote:
I feel like making Shakuras only cross positions makes it even more boring. It's essentially just 2 bases with easily defendable naturals seperated by a huge open expanse. Dull.
Really? I think the opposite, in TvZ at least. Going down that corridor and knowing the game most likely wouldn't go on for very much longer, regardless of who won, was quite annoying to me (wasn't always the case, but more so than often). "Close" positions completely eliminated the option of flanking. It was either 1) Deal ineffectively with T down a narrow corridor 2) Abandon main, rebuild elsewhere, try to counter attack natural and hope it's relatively undefended. Some of the more boring play, while cross expansions was always significantly more harass oriented.
|
Do these building blockers prevent a low ground wallin with supply + barracks?
That would be pretty lame.
|
i think it will be a downed supply depot like its on one of the gsl maps
|
On March 01 2011 19:50 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
What's with all these shitty building blockers? Seriously , it's a part of the game as cheese is a part of the game.And no close spawn? What the hell? Also part of the damn game.
All-Ins like early Proxibarracks are still possible.
Going a 2 Rax/Bunker-Push or some other Building Block and laugh at the sweating Zerg while T/P is doing a totally save and normal build is not.
You see the diffrence here?
|
I love the removal of close position spawns, they're boring.
|
Wow, truly awesome. Way to have the balls to actually prevent close positions, I won't be in Dallas, but I'll be sure to make it out to at least 1 or 2 events this season.
|
On March 01 2011 19:50 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
What's with all these shitty building blockers? Seriously , it's a part of the game as cheese is a part of the game.And no close spawn? What the hell? Also part of the damn game.
You act like they removed the whole concept of cheese, rushes and all-ins. It is still possible to do those even if there are building blockers.
EDIT: minor grammar correction
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
