|
On March 03 2011 22:10 Rialz wrote:
I completely lost faith in Blizzard when they said that they added slag pits because they liked macro maps and that slag pits was more macro heavy than metalopolis.
But it is a step in the right direction though, it's good to see they care and are trying to improve.
Well, you could say that they are at least "trying" to create macro maps....failing, but trying. It's better than nothing I guess 
|
Loving the new map pool, the new maps are good, the new lost temple is good. The only map I have veto'ed is delta quadrant right now. I might end up veto'ing more as people get better at abusing certain maps, who knows. Hands down it is a huge improvement over the old map pool, definitely much more macro friendly than the old pool, but all-ins and one base play are still possible. Personally I prefer to have macro friendly rather than "guaranteed macro" maps. I used to love shakuras but it got really annoying when the terran hallway became so popular, it's really pretty stupid for the difficulty in a matchup to drastically change based on spawning positions, really just as bad as close positions on metal if not worse. I mean when standard play becomes sack your main and counter attack I kind of think that implies it's a bad map, but that's just IMO.
|
On March 03 2011 19:18 unSpeake wrote:
Getting really tired of these natural bases with 2-3 wide ass entrances. Makes it really hard to get a legitimate game on them
THAT IS A GOOD THING.
Why are you assuming you should get a worry free expansion on every single map? Forge FE should not be completely viable on every single map. Those maps mean that economic cheese can be punished, and things like 1 rax FE and 1 gate FE are economic cheese.
I like big macro games as much has anyone, but I also hate that the trend amongst the pro maps definitely going towards NO rushes or all-ins. On maps like Shakuras, there was basically no threat of an all-in, because you can block off your nat ramp with a building and a defensive structure, and the rush distance was so long, your only real option was a proxy anyways. On some of the GSL maps, if you scout the wrong base twice, you can't cheese, simple as that. Not even the option for cheese. They'll have a rax or two and an expo on the way already by the time you get there. That is NOT good for gameplay. I've seen plenty of people go CC/nexus first on these maps, without even scouting, which is just ludicrous, imo. Heck, zergs can go 3 hatch before pool sometimes. That is somewhat cool for now because it's so novel, but that gets old fast too.
There needs to be threat of pressure keeping people from just pure power macroing for the first 20 minutes of a "game". Power turtle macro into 200/200 death ball for 20 minutes, one 15 second engagement, and a GG. That's the trend these big "macro maps" is going toward, and that is even less fun than 2 rax all-ins. That's just sim-city with a happy ending.
Imo, Blizzard has the right idea, although I admit they don't have amazing execution with some of their ideas, and they seem quite blind to basic map abuse strategies.
But just look at maps like Xel'naga. It has all the "broken features" that many of you whine about, yet it plays extremely solid, and leads to both exciting macro games and great 1 base all-ins. Lets see, no easy third, wide open natural, rocks blocking both the gold and third, dominant xel'naga towers, holding a 4th and 5th base is basically impossible, and it's hard to scout the main. It is so fun to watch because as a player you have so many options, many of them equally viable.
|
Well you can always 4gate...lol
Seriously though, a natural should not be under super heavy siege all the time. It's ok that it's riskier to take the 2nd base than to just camp on top of your ramp but then again, having it exposed to any kind of aggression from everywhere is just very silly and promotes playing the "safe" bet 1base all in. The expo by design costs quite some money and has to pay for itself over time, that weakness is what should make expoing risky, not the fact, that any push from any random side can never be defended if you didn't guess correctly with your army or are unlucky with his angle and your static defense.
|
(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. Some of the key features of this map are the low-ground high-yield expansions, the two lines of shrub area that can be used to position units, as well as the low-ground watch tower that watches over all of the low-ground center.
This was the joke of the month, seriously.
hahahaaha, Blizzard so funny nowadays.
|
as a 2v2-player (AT), im really happy to see arid wastes, tarsonis assault and warzone kicked out of the mappool.
unfortunately twilight fortress istn in the pool anymore  , dont see the problem on macro-heavy maps/longer games.
|
For the ladder map changes, the rush-possible maps we’ll have will be four-player maps only.
Fascinating. I wonder which maps they think those are?
|
So isn't a larger ramp still easier to defend than an exposed expo as on xel naga or metalopolis?
|
On March 04 2011 00:45 butter wrote:Show nested quote +For the ladder map changes, the rush-possible maps we’ll have will be four-player maps only. Fascinating. I wonder which maps they think those are?
Probably Typhon Peaks as it has "destructible rocks that open alternative attack paths".
|
I like the new maps. They are fresh and seem to be enjoyable for the most part. DQ is an iffy map and hopefully it is rotated out sooner or later. Guess that is what a veto can be used for.
There is a lot of crying in this thread and forums though, I guess I am just sick of reading Terran this Terran that, tanks are too good, any map with a cliff is a Terran favoured map, I can't expand 3 times before I build a unit producing structure(this one a bit exaggerated)!
Blizzard's explanaitons seem odd, but remember they are at least trying to explain stuff. I'd rather have some sort of explanation than nothing at all.
|
On March 03 2011 22:03 eloist wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2011 20:12 wimbowaia wrote:On March 03 2011 19:18 unSpeake wrote:
Getting really tired of these natural bases with 2-3 wide ass entrances. Makes it really hard to get a legitimate game on them Thats another thing. They are actually doing that on purpose. Blizzard don't want naturals to be easily blocked off/defended. But at the same time they have mentioned that they want more macro maps and less all ins. Do they not understand that those 2 things are related? Naturals with huge undefendable entrances or even no entrance at all, just cause people to all in even more. But blizzard just don't understand this. It makes no sense at all, and proves once again that blizzard don't understand how the game works and therefor should not be the ones making maps for competitive play. Its ok that blizzard is just not good enough to make good maps, but its NOT ok to still force the community to play the terrible maps they make, when theres clearly better alternatives for maps available. It makes me so furious. I am going to argue that they understand this game better than you do and have more foresight. A narrow choke natural is never going to be balanced and Zerg will suffer the most from it in the long run and we are already seeing this develop. No one seems to have really found a reliable way to deal with forge fast expand into 1 stargate with phoenix void ray into colossus and this will not get any better. The only thing we've seen are do or die roach all ins which are a coin flip at best. Games coming from this will just get increasingly worse because the skill ceiling for defense is just higher than for offense and people will get better at it. The reason that they took out shakuras is not that it made for bad games but because it will make for increasingly stale games as we go forward and the game develops. The map just always plays out in at max one of three ways. Having played a few games on Typhon made me realize this because I effectively got owned because my opponents played the map way better than I did and it was immeditately obvious to me that this is what happened. And by this I don't mean doom push through rocks, I just got outmaneuvered. So I would give Blizz the benefit of the doubt here and see how these maps play out first. For me at least, it's clear that I need a few games on these to figure out how to play them best whereas shakuras it was just really straight forward. EDIT: Additional point is that a two base all in is not much different from a one base all in in terms of appeal of the resulting game and I wouldn't call those macro games.
First of all your saying we can't have narrow chokes, because they lead to macro games, which leads to protoss getting an unkillable army for zerg. Now if thats the case, thats a race balance issue, not a map issue. You can't argue that we can't have macro maps because a race gets to strong in the late game, cause clearly, then its one of the races that needs a buff/nerf. And its is no secret that zerg is in need of something like that.
And no, people who think slag pits is a replacement for shakuras, and an equal to metalopolis, does NOT understand the game better then me, thats outrageous.
And your justifying removing shakuras because "it will make for increasingly stale games as we go forward and the game develops". How about worrying about the present, and removing some of the god awful small shit maps we currently have, before removing the best map in the pool because of the future?? It was indeed the best map, and that statement is certainly not only my own opinion. There is just no justification for removing shakuras at this point in time.
I respect your patience in waiting to see how these maps plays out, but sorry, the maps just arent good enough. The average map size is still to small, and with undefendable naturals, they just encourage more all ins and rushing. And I totally agree with you, two base all ins are not much better than one base all ins, but how can you use that as an argument for defending the current maps, when they actually encourage all ins? Thats exactly why we need bigger maps, with reasonably defendable naturals.
|
After testing them out for a while, I think Backwater is pretty horrible (natural is so weird. 3 ramps ? ramp to base not even in line with the natural ?).
But I actually like the rest. I think Slag Pits should be cross position only, but besides that it's not as bad as people say. Typhon Peaks is actually a pretty good map; similar to Xel Naga in a few ways.
|
I think this is a step in the right direction. Not a big one though. The GSL maps are far superior in design than the new Blizzard maps. I think they should've considered some of those first. Given they probably will be switching through maps frequently until people find the ones they like, this isn't that big of an issue.
I do not like them taking out shakura's plateau though =( I completely understand the reasoning but shakuras has given some incredible games. I think it's just a little bit early to take it out, maybe if they waited until the rest of the maps were proven and satisfactory could they take out shakuras.
|
I'm not sure how slag spits is more macro heavy than Metal... but hey the GSL map is incredible news so props to Blizz. Any thoughts which GSL map it is? I'm thinking Crevasse.
|
On March 03 2011 13:14 Caphe wrote:
Its good to know that they start to consider GSL map. And its also sad to see that the reason they remove Shakuras was because " Its a very plain macro map" What? Blizzard must be high on something.
Their reasoning makes perfect sense and I agree with that. I liked playing on shakuras but only because it was different from the other maps. The single viable attack path and easy to defend mains were a problem though and made alot of games boring. Then again, I find the games on terminus boring and everyone else seems to love that map...
I hope if they choose crevasse that they add a 2nd gas at the in-base natural. Right now in GSL people are downvoting it because 1 gas at the natural heavily favors terran. If they put the 2nd gas back in it would be alot more balanced for ladder
Tal'darim's too big, I hope that doesn't end up in the pool. People in master league already barely know how to attack. Its gonna be another 200 food army vs 200 food army map that drags on forever. Its fun to watch in GSL but average players are going to make that map a drag
|
There aren't enough "interesting features" on Shakuras? Does every map have to have tons of gold bases and destructible rocks to be "interesting"?
|
What the hell. I dont understand their logic.
|
On March 03 2011 23:02 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2011 22:10 Rialz wrote:
I completely lost faith in Blizzard when they said that they added slag pits because they liked macro maps and that slag pits was more macro heavy than metalopolis.
But it is a step in the right direction though, it's good to see they care and are trying to improve. Well, you could say that they are at least "trying" to create macro maps....failing, but trying. It's better than nothing I guess
It really is better than nothing as I'm sure Blizz could hardly stand to hear another whine about the sucky map pool. There's no way for Blizz to straight up make a large macro map like the ones in BW because they already stated that Zerg was straight up OP on large maps with 4+ bases all on the edges.
I just wish people would drop the fallacious comparisons to BW and allow sc2 to make its own path in terms of maps, units, gameplay, etc.
(I personally really like all the maps.  )
|
On March 03 2011 13:09 kNyTTyM wrote:
SHakuras description makes me uggggg. Really what kind of reason is that
It's a bullshit PR excuse to avoid admitting that Blizzard maps need to force encounters.
At least 3 votes is enough to veto most of the shitty maps in 1v1 now. It sucks that they're only removing one of the terrible 3v3 maps (admittedly it is the worst one).
|
ughh there comment about shakuras made my head hurt. Look and mvp vs idra there is a ton of opportunity for harassment and just because it doesnt have destructible rocks at every base its plain?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
