EPTGSL Maps on Ladder SOON™ - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Kyhol
Canada2575 Posts
| ||
|
Ouga
Finland645 Posts
 | ||
|
Senorcuidado
United States700 Posts
I really really hope they add three GSL maps and can the other new ones. | ||
|
kasumimi
Greece460 Posts
On March 08 2011 10:06 avilo wrote: My faith in humanity has been restored    I wouldn't go that far, but definitely increased | ||
|
IamBach
United States1059 Posts
| ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
| ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
| ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:18 Gentso wrote: You know, I still don't get why Blizzard is so insistent on actually having maps designed for rushing. the same reason they have maps designed for macro. if you can only do one thing well you're not just worse for it, you're a thousand times more boring | ||
|
monitor
United States2408 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:21 Eknoid4 wrote: the same reason they have maps designed for macro. if you can only do one thing well you're not just worse for it, you're a thousand times more boring Macro is the basis of the entire game, even Blizzard admits it. Rushing is fine, but imbalanced maps are not. | ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:26 monitor wrote: Macro is the basis of the entire game, even Blizzard admits it. Rushing is fine, but imbalanced maps are not. And that's probably why those maps are gradually being pushed out of map pools in for-pay tournaments. | ||
|
PBJ
United States141 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:21 Eknoid4 wrote: the same reason they have maps designed for macro. if you can only do one thing well you're not just worse for it, you're a thousand times more boring The difference is that on a so-called "rush map" you don't have the option to go for a macro-centric game because you are forced into one type of strategy. On a so-called "macro map" you aren't stopped from rushing - both rushing and playing for the long game are possible on the map, only going for a rush and failing is much more punishing, like it should be. If it weren't possible to rush on huge maps with lots of expansions, how do you explain all the cheesing in BW and the roach rushes against FEing protosses in this GSL? | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
See guys, Blizzard may take a while, but they always get things right. This is so much better than the 1 GSL map they were hinting at. Also this is quite nice to see such thought into the pool, the way they split up the maps into 3 categories and you have 3 thumbs down. Even cooler is that, although close positions aren't that good, "macro" maps like Shattered Temple will probably be Intermediate, while even more macro maps will be the GSL ones. There is however a problem I see. Although Zerg can be aggressive, usually they play reactive. If all Zergs thumbs down the aggressive maps, then Zergs will be having quite a lot of ZvZs. Likewise, Terran rushers may end up having many TvT in the aggressive maps. Perhaps they can restrict the way you spend thumbs down votes? For example, 1 for each category or such. Edit: Nevermind this probably won't be much of a problem; like others said, while a macro game on an aggressive map will be almost impossible, but rush and macro styles are viable on macro maps and somewhat on the intermediate maps. Meaning, the aggressive maps will sort of be like the ones the lower leagues may like; higher level players may tend to ban all 3 aggressive maps, leaving 3 intermediate and 3 macro in which all kinds of styles fare decently well. Likewise, a lower league player may want to ban the 3 macro maps because they'll just turtle for like an hour and make a billion Carriers xD | ||
|
MassHysteria
United States3678 Posts
But that's pretty cool, depending on what maps they decide to eliminate, and the overall pool once decided. | ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:31 PBJ wrote: The difference is that on a so-called "rush map" you don't have the option to go for a macro-centric game because you are forced into one type of strategy. On a so-called "macro map" you aren't stopped from rushing - both rushing and playing for the long game are possible on the map, only going for a rush and failing is much more punishing, like it should be. If it weren't possible to rush on huge maps with lots of expansions, how do you explain all the cheesing in BW and the roach rushes against FEing protosses in this GSL? Good thing there has never been a maxed army vs maxed army war on steppes of war, otherwise your example would have a hole in it. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
 Would have liked Crossfire SE over Tal'Darim Altar, but not like they won't change map pool and rotate etc. :D | ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
| ||
|
Nub4ever
Canada1981 Posts
| ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
On March 08 2011 11:26 monitor wrote: Macro is the basis of the entire game, even Blizzard admits it. Rushing is fine, but imbalanced maps are not. Actually, they're just saying the macro play isn't bad. They have rush maps because a decent subset of their player base likes them. Just because those people don't post here doesn't mean they don't exist. Blizzard is being very nice in allowing us not to ever have to play on a rush map if we don't want to. They're being very nice in allowing non-tourney types to never have to play on a big macro map if they don't want to. With the new map changes, you can use your downvotes to never play a rush map again. Isn't that cool? Everyone gets to play the types of maps they like. How baller. We hated rush maps because they were overabundant on the ladder. Now we can choose to never see them, and only play on big macro maps or smaller but still good maps like XNC. No one ever has a need to complain about rush maps, because no one ever needs to play them on the ladder. That's almost even bigger than the GSL maps. By the way, everyone who said we should have better maps for Masters and rush maps for the "casuals", Blizzard has kind of done this in a way that doesn't punish lower-ranked macro-hungry players. They did it better than people on TL were asking for! Everyone can play on maps they like, regardless of league! I'm actually really impressed with how Blizzard is doing this. Yeah, it took them forever, but it's Blizzard. I'm used to that from them. | ||
|
Murfshake
46 Posts
| ||
W2
United States1177 Posts
| ||
| ||
