Patch 1.3 Map Changes - Page 20
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
Tablespoon
Norway223 Posts
New shakuras looks cool as well. Definitely going to try them out once I get home. | ||
GenesisX
Canada4267 Posts
On March 23 2011 11:55 Ribbon wrote: Considering that the point of the changes was to make horizontal spawns not be bad, I doubt it. No, you can have horizontal spawns also. EDIT: And maybe its just me but did they add a 2v2 map also? :O Idk I don't play 2v2 often but I haven't seen some of these maps before lol. | ||
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On March 23 2011 17:05 Kaitlin wrote: Protoss, be very careful if you intend to wall in on Backwater Gulch at the top of the ramps into the main base. You can't have the same wall as ALL the other maps. Got caught off guard by that as well. Delayed by gateway by 15seconds trying to figure out where exactly I needed to wall off, at first I thought I was blanking out and forgot how to wall off... | ||
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
That's what I said. | ||
RevViETrice
United States8 Posts
| ||
chrisolo
Germany2604 Posts
They should remove those rocks ... | ||
Tgee
Denmark54 Posts
| ||
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On March 23 2011 15:58 Shooks wrote: They actually widened the choke point on the new GSL map, so you can't really FE vs Zerg as Protoss, I really wish they said that in the patch notes before I played a match on it :/ Cool, yet another "awsome" new change. And by "awsome" I mean terrible, stupid, redonculous, etc. Blizz never seizes to surprise me in the most negative ways, somebody should give Dustin Browder his "milestone" award for most epic trolling already. | ||
AimlessAmoeba
Canada704 Posts
ROCKS! MOAR ROCKS! Also, I hear in 1.4 you need to destroy some rocks before you can click the "Find Match" button. | ||
Baum
Germany1010 Posts
| ||
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
NeoSlicerZ
Ireland470 Posts
| ||
Irave
United States9965 Posts
| ||
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
On March 24 2011 00:04 Kaitlin wrote: Here's to hoping somebody with exceptional knowledge and experience (far beyond mine) can screenshot the most appropriate wall-off for Protoss on Backwater Gulch... it's not too hard.. i just wall off with gate cyber (beside each other horizontally not diagonally as usual), and a zlot. works fine. | ||
Miragee
8290 Posts
Also great, that they add a GSL-Map. Not so great, that they add rocks to make it terrible. -.- Man I HATE destructible rocks. Just the worst invention in the history of mapmaking. In the begining I found it interesting because of the fact there were some good maps with good attitudes of backdoor like Medusa or Benzeene. But now, what happened? Every fucking map has some destructible rocks. It's not unique feature as it should be, it's just everywhere like trash. It's boring and didn't even invent good tactical possibilities but constrict the gameplay often times. Enough raged though...I'm glad about the first half-of-a-good-step by Blizzard regarding the mappool. | ||
Danners933
Canada76 Posts
| ||
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
Blizz explained their reasoning for the changes. I bolded some parts I find interesting. Shakuras Plateau Player feedback is incredibly important to us, so we decided to bring back Shakuras Plateau due in large part to popular demand by the community. There were two issues with this map, however, that we wanted to address before adding it back into the ladder pool (issues that we felt were severe enough to merit the removal of the map in the first place). The first issue was that the horizontal starting locations were extremely unfair in TvZ matchups (in favor of terran), and the second issue was that players only had one path to navigate around the map's center. To help correct these balance issues, we've made the following changes to its layout: The backdoor ramp and rocks leading into main base have been removed to address the horizontal start location issue. Two rocked-off ramps have been added leading from the 6 o'clock and 12 o'clock expansions towards the middle to create an alternate path in the mid/late game to navigate around the center of the map. The rocks by the center Xel'Naga Towers have been removed. We were noticing that if these rocks were there, it became very difficult to utilize the new rocked off-paths in the middle of the map (due to how difficult it was to clear out the Xel'Naga Tower area). We feel the changes we've made will allow this player favorite to return as a strong ladder map and are looking forward to seeing new strategies develop. I find it interesting that "Too easy to take your natural" wasn't one of the problems, given that was in some interview. I guess this confirms my suspicions that the guy giving the interview didn't know what he was talking about. Tal'darim Altar Back in February, we put up several new maps on the PTR for testing, during which time we evaluated their overall strengths and weaknesses. In addition to making improvements to some of the test maps before putting them on the live ladder rotation, we also decided to explore adding user-made GSL maps to our own ladder. Tal'darim Altar stood out due to its macro-heavy layout, well-protected natural, solid Xel'Naga Tower placements, and variety of harassment options. We had some concerns about certain aspects of the map's design, though, and have therefore made the following changes: The high ground area near the center Xel'Naga Tower is now larger. This makes it easier to tell if units on the lower ground can see up. The size of the area around the second expansion has been increased. We noticed that a lot of fights tend to occur in this area of the map, but that the area itself was just too narrow to allow for decent mid-sized battles. Added a path for cliff walking units just outside of the natural expansion leading into the starting base. With this addition, we believe that players will be less likely to just sit back and defend their natural. The size of the ramps leading to the natural and second expansions has been increased, as they were a bit too narrow and easy to defend previously. Several short line-of-sight blockers have been removed. We felt that many of these LoS blockers were just too short and exposed to be effective. The second expansion has been changed to include full minerals, but destructible rocks have been added to compensate for this base's increased value. We want players to be able to plan their strategy on an expansion-per-expansion level, not on a mineral patch-for-mineral patch level. We also feel that partial resources can be a confusing way to balance maps for many players and, in general, it's not something we want to do for normal ladder play. The shrub area around the third expansion has been extended. The original area suffered from the same issue as most of the short LoS blockers, but we also thought it would be cool to extend it so that attacking this expansion becomes slightly more difficult when air units are not in play. So the reasoning for the rocks is that they wanted expansions to be the same across maps, and not have "gimmicky" expos. Thus, three full bases right away was probably a bit too strong. I wouldn't be surprised if the third on "Terminus LE" has similar changes if/when it's added to the pool. | ||
butter
United States785 Posts
Tal'darim Altar stood out due to its macro-heavy layout, well-protected natural, solid Xel'Naga Tower placements, and variety of harassment options. We had some concerns about certain aspects of the map's design, though, and have therefore made the following changes: [...]
I'm not sure how to take this. It starts promisingly enough with praise for the "macro-heavy layout" and "well-protected natural", but it seems that these qualities are actually problematic for their concept of a ladder map. And I don't know how someone who obviously watches GSL could write that bit about the cliff-walking path... They don't even mention their change to the choke to discourage walling, but we can be sure this was their intention; the last time we heard from Blizzard's mapmakers, they had this to say about Lost Temple: "The choke point by the natural expansions were too small; it was possible to block them off easily using only a few buildings." The second expansion has been changed to include full minerals, but destructible rocks have been added to compensate for this base's increased value. We want players to be able to plan their strategy on an expansion-per-expansion level, not on a mineral patch-for-mineral patch level. We also feel that partial resources can be a confusing way to balance maps for many players and, in general, it's not something we want to do for normal ladder play. This is a naive idea which Blizzard must eventually be cured of. Tweaking resource counts is a routine and necessary balancing tool. Anyone whose strategy is planned out so carefully that it depends on the resource counts at their third is capable of sorting out their own confusion. Somewhat more concerning is the suggestion that they intend "normal ladder play" to continue to diverge from tournament map pools. On Shakuras Plateau, There isn't a huge problem with this map, but we feel there aren't enough interesting features. But three weeks later, There were two issues with this map, however, that we wanted to address before adding it back into the ladder pool (issues that we felt were severe enough to merit the removal of the map in the first place) That clears that up, then... | ||
imareaver3
United States906 Posts
| ||
| ||