| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Backpack
United States1776 Posts
On March 02 2011 00:44 TT1 wrote: excellent map pool apart from scrap station, one of the most horrible maps for toss They have to put it in there so you won't waste your veto on a good map ^^ | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On March 02 2011 04:46 Raiznhell wrote: What I don't like is how there is NO close positions at all. Like if ramps cannot be blocked anymore then why not keep close positions in it adds an entertaining element to the game I mean i get that Zerg players whine a whole bunch about it but it's not like their win-rate in close positions is less than 40%. It's like people are trying to eliminate cheese altogether and also trying to make the game favor 1 race. People forget cheese is still done SO often in BW and also there are maps where close positions is a factor like Python for example. Otherwise I do love the maps but rigging them has me feeling uncomfortable. I'd actually be surprised if it was even 40% close positions. Either way it's not close entirely that's the problem, it's close on metal/LT/ST that's the issue. On those maps Zerg is pretty much forced into 2 base play given the layout of the map. There's no accessible 3rd when you are in close positions and any 2 base T/P player generally demands a 3rd. With the layout as it is it's very difficult to properly defend a remote 3rd on those maps, especially with drops, hellions, creep, and warp-in mechanics. Likewise the timings on those maps get pretty thrown off close positions just due to how close the maps actually are. You could definitely design maps that work with close positions. Shakuras, if it was longer vertically, could work close positions because it'd still be viable for Zerg to get 3-4 bases even when they spawn close positions. If you look at python you'll see that even spawning close positions doesn't prevent multiple expansions. Players are free to expand along the sides of the maps away from the other players in such a way that doesn't expose a huge vulnerability or a completely new attack route. Basically in Python there's still some general common areas you can position your army to defend your main, natural, and 3rd. In close metal there's no such thing. Your army is either defending the main/nat or defending the 3rd. Metal/LT are also too small/cramped in the middle to be able to hold middle ground to deny attack routes towards a 3rd (though ST is better about this). Zerg can't really hold a mid-map position on these maps to deny attacks on their 3rds. So EVEN if the winrates are balanced it's still bad because it causes games to be 1-2 base all-ins and busts with little to no chance of progressing beyond that. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
And Testbug looks really awesome! I like how more mapmakers are taking advantage of the way texturing works and having each side of the map have a different theme. There was a map in the map forum where it was volcanic at the top, forrest/grass in the middle, and then beach at the bottom. So it was like this Hawaiian island theme overall. | ||
Teras
Great Britain103 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
What I really don't like, like drewbie succinctly said (lol), is that cross positions may be more favorable for Zerg in ZvT. I agree that some maps were coinflips, but...you gotta remember there were two sides of the coin. Close positions it was ez mode for TvZ, far positions it was ez mode for ZvT... -_- | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On March 02 2011 10:25 avilo wrote: I absolutely love that they listened are being one of the first big tournaments to finally implement good maps (anything better than the current ladder map pool). What I really don't like, like drewbie succinctly said (lol), is that cross positions may be more favorable for Zerg in ZvT. I agree that some maps were coinflips, but...you gotta remember there were two sides of the coin. Close positions it was ez mode for TvZ, far positions it was ez mode for ZvT... -_- While you have a point, I'd say that the favorable spots for Terran gave a much larger advantage than a favorable spot for Zerg. Close positions would give T a MAJOR advantage, while cross gave Zerg a slight/moderate. | ||
|
arterian
Canada1157 Posts
| ||
|
kvn4444
1510 Posts
| ||
|
JerKy
Korea (South)3013 Posts
| ||
|
monitor
United States2409 Posts
On March 02 2011 14:57 JerKy wrote: It's going to be interesting to see how some of the cheesier players adapt to the inability to wall off ramps in vZ. I agree. More notably, I think its weird MLG went with building blockers. Instead, why not use a lowered supply depo? Maybe its too big but... the building blocker makes it impossible to ever wall off, while the lowered supply depo would only prevent it as early game cheese. | ||
|
phantaxx
United States201 Posts
| ||
|
LagT_T
Argentina535 Posts
Metalopolis: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/i7Cd6.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/XxIZ6.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Z9hmI.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/9fXrU.jpg) Shattered temple: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/gddXF.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/hx25J.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/e4D0c.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/3GoJ1.jpg) Shakuras Plateau: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/DQLNL.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/NL4kR.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/8DR8w.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Qg2RA.jpg) | ||
|
ReachTheSky
United States3294 Posts
| ||
|
rift
1819 Posts
| ||
|
ReachTheSky
United States3294 Posts
On March 02 2011 14:43 FabledIntegral wrote: While you have a point, I'd say that the favorable spots for Terran gave a much larger advantage than a favorable spot for Zerg. Close positions would give T a MAJOR advantage, while cross gave Zerg a slight/moderate. Actually cross map meta is huge favored for zerg. They can drone up to 45 drones without having to make more than 6 lings rofl. Talk about being economically ahead. Its silly. Even if terran goes 1 rax f/e you are still way behind  | ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
On March 09 2011 13:13 ReachTheSky wrote: So i just played Meta from the mlg pool. The fact that u can't spawn close ground positions is retarded. By doing this your taking out certain elements from the game allowing zerg to be as greedy as they want. They don't have any pressure to worry about now. Also, not being able to wall at the bottom of your ramp is also silly. I can understand you guys want to prevent the whole bunker rush/pylon shenanigans but it also takes away from non rush tactics. I would love to know who thought if this idea. -- Terran's and Protoss' can still be as aggressive as they want. They just won't have a 100% win with a timing push that Z's can't stop (or if they stop it, they have to sacrifice a huge amount of economy that will be a detriment later on). There is no way you can say that Zergs don't have to worry about pressure any more. This is the least accurate statement ever. Two base 5-6 gate Protoss pushes and 2 Rax Terran openings still apply a lot of pressure to the Zerg without automatically killing him. | ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
On March 02 2011 14:43 FabledIntegral wrote: While you have a point, I'd say that the favorable spots for Terran gave a much larger advantage than a favorable spot for Zerg. Close positions would give T a MAJOR advantage, while cross gave Zerg a slight/moderate. Also, terran advantageous positions make for shitty short games that everybody is sick of. | ||
|
BrodiaQ
United States892 Posts
On March 09 2011 13:13 ReachTheSky wrote: So i just played Meta from the mlg pool. The fact that u can't spawn close ground positions is retarded. By doing this your taking out certain elements from the game allowing zerg to be as greedy as they want. They don't have any pressure to worry about now. Also, not being able to wall at the bottom of your ramp is also silly. I can understand you guys want to prevent the whole bunker rush/pylon shenanigans but it also takes away from non rush tactics. I would love to know who thought if this idea. -- Also I think the wall in on the bottom of the ramp was something mlg was trying to "fix". With it zergs would have to send a drone at 7 or 8 to be able to have a chance to scout, which would just be too early and too taxing on the zergs early game economy. And if zergs are gonna be greedy why don't you be greedy back? i expect to see some CC first builds to keep zergs' economies from getting out of hand. | ||
|
PhiliBiRD
United States2643 Posts
On March 01 2011 08:50 Brutus wrote: This is a huge change which makes the maps exactly 684% more awesome. I have been thinking about that since shakuras plateau, great change imo. im sure every zerg player agrees. kinda ridiculous to make a map ONLY zerg favored. | ||
|
cHaNg-sTa
United States1058 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Heroes of the Storm Other Games FrodaN1746 C9.Mang0343 PiGStarcraft288 ToD274 XaKoH  232KnowMe215 Liquid`Hasu205 syndereN164 JuggernautJason38 |
|
OSC
Yamato Cup
IPSL
Artosis vs RiceHat
Kyrie vs Sony
Map Test Tournament
WardiTV Weekly
Ultimate Battle
Rush vs BeSt
Replay Cast
Rogue vs Classic
Patches Events
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
