|
Map isn't terrible.
Ensnare lost that game because he went like 14min Medivacs, and only had 3 Medivacs and 5 Viking against 8 Colossus + 10 Phoenixes.
I'm not even sure what Ensnare was doing, how does the Protoss manage to get the more expensive army as well as keeping up with upgrades when the Terran had his expansion up as well as it mining long before Protoss's natural went up?
This is just like a 3gate into double forge against Mech. Toss manages to deny the Terrans expo then after expanding himself sits around and is surprised at the end of the game when his mass Gateway/Colossus composition gets crushed by the Terran who was going Mech, even though the Toss was incredibly far ahead on upgrades and macro.
|
I'm just confused why, of all the maps in the pool, it was TAL'DARIM ALTAR that NASL looked at and thought "You know what? This needs more bases".
I don't think it ruins the map or anything, but it doesn't add anything, and the Blizzard version has the advantage of being on the ladder and thus being easier to practice on.
I was a big fan of them trying a less-popular map like Backwater, until I saw Ensnare vs Incontrol and realized they didn't disable close spawns, which baffles me. When Blizz said they'd only make "rush maps" that were rush maps on close spawns, I thought that was a not-so-subtle hint that "Enough people on the ladder are casuals who like rushes that we don't want to get rid of rushy maps entirely. We'll try to make some maps that are good for tournaments, and some maps that are good for tournaments with close spawns disabled, and hopefully at least 5 of the 10 on the ladder will be good enough that you can get a map pool of ladder maps".
Close spawns are incredibly difficult for Zerg, which has been proven again and again over a period of months. Why aren't they disabled?
Also, Ensnare played ATROCIOUSLY, going mass bio against a protoss who was going mass colossus and hardly pressuring at all.
|
I just think the rocks on the expansions are bad.
So much Strategy that is in Starcraft2 revolves around when you take that third expansion and by adding rocks you basically limit the options player can do because you have to get units out do destroy them reasonable fast.
I also dislike gold bases but that´s something personal.
|
Why did NASL switch maps and make their own tinkerings with the GSL maps? That's the question.
|
i just hope they add some fuckin rocks to the natural ramp. otherwise pvp is 100% 4 gate on that fuckin map.
|
NASL has an overall terrible map pool. Their changes to Tal'darim make absolutely no sense either.
|
Hmmm, no wonder the map looked weird during that game. Still it didn't affect the outcome of the game.
Hopefully they use a better version of the map in the future
|
On April 15 2011 05:11 infinity21 wrote:
Although ensnare reacted poorly to inc's phoenix Colo composition (not enough Vikings and no ghosts), I think the changes definitely favour Protoss.
He had ghosts.
|
Ah, I felt that the sizes (natural "ramp" and entrance) were different from Blizzard's to the older GSL's xD
And wow, they changed the maps? Why didn't they announce the changes? Did even the players get to know the changes? Perhaps Incontrol wanted to rig it to help him? Just putting it out there, not that I believe it (which I don't), it's just that people may think this and it would look bad for him =O
And uh yeah, I really don't like these changes, lol...
|
Those changes are terrible. The GSL TDA was fine, why does everyone insist on modifying it when they're only making it worse...
|
Didn't Incontrol say "thanks to whoever made those ramps" during his interview? I swear I heard him say something like that!
|
On April 15 2011 08:20 Techno wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2011 05:11 infinity21 wrote:
Although ensnare reacted poorly to inc's phoenix Colo composition (not enough Vikings and no ghosts), I think the changes definitely favour Protoss. He had ghosts.
Yeah but they didn't take part in the fight that lost him the game.
... although you could argue that he had lost the game before that fight anyway. But still, he didn't have ghosts when they could have mattered.
|
Would be interesting to hear their thought process behind the changes. Considering that GSL maps probably get tested quite a bit before they are thrown in there. To add gold bases and rocks and not test for balance purposes...
|
It's kinda funny how the map gets blamed when the Terran is ahead 50-70 food and 1 expo in midgame with better upgrades to boot and still can't win against Colossus.
|
It's kinda funny how the map gets blamed when the Terran is ahead 50-70 food and 1 expo in midgame with better upgrades to boot and still can't win against Colossus.
I don't see how it's funny to think that may be true.
What else would it be? Unless you think Incontrol was simply that much better to beat someone who had 50-70 more food.
|
On April 15 2011 08:34 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +
It's kinda funny how the map gets blamed when the Terran is ahead 50-70 food and 1 expo in midgame with better upgrades to boot and still can't win against Colossus.
I don't see how it's funny to think that may be true. What else would it be? Unless you think Incontrol was simply that much better to beat someone who had 50-70 more food.
I think he's making a balance whine.
|
On April 15 2011 07:59 Ribbon wrote:
I'm just confused why, of all the maps in the pool, it was TAL'DARIM ALTAR that NASL looked at and thought "You know what? This needs more bases".
I don't think it ruins the map or anything, but it doesn't add anything, and the Blizzard version has the advantage of being on the ladder and thus being easier to practice on.
I was a big fan of them trying a less-popular map like Backwater, until I saw Ensnare vs Incontrol and realized they didn't disable close spawns, which baffles me. When Blizz said they'd only make "rush maps" that were rush maps on close spawns, I thought that was a not-so-subtle hint that "Enough people on the ladder are casuals who like rushes that we don't want to get rid of rushy maps entirely. We'll try to make some maps that are good for tournaments, and some maps that are good for tournaments with close spawns disabled, and hopefully at least 5 of the 10 on the ladder will be good enough that you can get a map pool of ladder maps".
Close spawns are incredibly difficult for Zerg, which has been proven again and again over a period of months. Why aren't they disabled?
Also, Ensnare played ATROCIOUSLY, going mass bio against a protoss who was going mass colossus and hardly pressuring at all.
Close spawns on Backwater aren't really that close. Have you played the map on ladder? At least from my feel when I roll the map, the spawns are all really, really far apart. 2raxing will not ever be successful. Plus the multi-exit rocks, as we saw in the qxc vs. MooNaN (right?) game make tank pushes less effective in some ways.
As to everyone saying "NASL altered it!" did you read earlier in the thread? It's an earlier version of Altar. That does beg the question of "Why are they using the earlier version?", but be informed before spewing nonsense.
|
Russian Federation484 Posts
On April 15 2011 08:38 TheTenthDoc wrote:
As to everyone saying "NASL altered it!" did you read earlier in the thread? It's an earlier version of Altar. That does beg the question of "Why are they using the earlier version?", but be informed before spewing nonsense.
I know there wasn't ever rocks from main to nat.
|
Smaller ramps make me sad. Rocks are not such a big deal, since you should be preparing to expand before you actually do, but I agree about the ramps making forcefields much stronger than they should be.
|
GSL Version is the best version. The version that blizz put on ladder is full of their shenanigans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
