|
On June 21 2011 03:12 Papulatus wrote: What does Blizzard have against 3rd bases? Do they want every map to be 2 base all-in?
Sigh
exactly! even the "macro map" seems to have less than 30 second traveltime from nat to nat. :/
|
Actually I want to know if siege tanks can hit the base across the cliff on the last 1v1 map... ie. if u put them on the bottom right main, can you hit the base on the center bottom?
|
well i dont think it can be any worse with 2 base scrap, dq and 1 base pits so it seems fine
|
On June 21 2011 03:11 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +The complaint against close positions is that it's anti zerg. Your points about solid chokes also make walling off against zerg easier.
It's not that what you've said is wrong, it just makes things worse, not better. No, it's not anti-zerg, it's anti-defensive-lategame-zerg. The smaller naturals help too, for defensive zergs. For example, Hellions aren't nearly as good.
In TvZ..
These maps are pretty universally awful for ZvP.
|
I don't think you can darkcloud.
|
United States7166 Posts
i like how map 2 is basically backwater gulch on crack.. walk 2 feet from your own natural platform and you're at your enemy's nat platform lol. at least the center doesnt suck anymore like backwater's did though. im assuming they'll change the ramp to the main as well as it seems too easy to avoid any defense youve put at your natural and waltz into your main
|
i dont think these maps look great >.< but i guess ill have to wait and play them before i judge
|
Kerrigan's wrath looks super interesting the more I look at it. It's a nice spin on backwater.
|
I really don't like the looks of these maps. Sure they will be playable, but just take a look at the GSL and ICcup maps. They are so so so so much better than those maps, surely blizzard can come up with something better. Slag Pits all over again !
|
Map 3 of the 1v1s looks like one big choke to me, I think zergs arn't going to like it one bit. Unless it is bigger than I imagine that is.
|
On June 21 2011 03:15 zawk9 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2011 03:11 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:The complaint against close positions is that it's anti zerg. Your points about solid chokes also make walling off against zerg easier.
It's not that what you've said is wrong, it just makes things worse, not better. No, it's not anti-zerg, it's anti-defensive-lategame-zerg. The smaller naturals help too, for defensive zergs. For example, Hellions aren't nearly as good. In TvZ.. These maps are pretty universally awful for ZvP.
The third map also takes into account the ZvP matchup;
on horizontal positions, it will be hard for either player to get a third, but harder for Protoss. Zergs can take a far away third on the other side of the map or take the Gold in the center.
On Cross and Vertical positions, you can easily split the map, and as Zerg take slightly more than half.
Edit:
On the third map, I think the middle should be slightly more opened, AKA make the "slit" in the ground a little smaller or just get rid of it...
|
Northern Ireland2557 Posts
great... rocks, new steppes of war, no third bases and only one proper map and positionally imbalanced maps because blizzard thinks that is somehow interesting. Thanks blizzard
|
Rocks, rocks everywhere...
Looking forward to the balance changes Blizzard will make based on data from games played on these. More Zerg buffs to make them overpowered on normal tournament maps, no doubt.
|
The first 3 maps seem to be very similar. Not very creative 4-player maps.
|
I dont get why they dont add 2 players maps and make so similar maps
|
Upon seeing those maps, I realised I will have to go ahead and pratice my 7 gate push.
If I build in my base in map2 is it considered a proxy ?
Why do they keep adding "rush maps" when everyone wants macro map ?
|
Unlike Kerrigan’s Wrath, Shifted Sky will have varying gameplay depending on where you and your opponent spawn. You’ll want to bring multiple strategies to this map, and adjust your game depending on your and your opponent’s start locations. This map also features an extremely large number of different attack paths, some of which can be opened up by breaking rocks.
Makes me pretty angry that that is their mindset. Its like metal 2.0. It is so gimmicky to have a map that is auto advantage for TvZ on certain spawns and auto disadvantage for TvZ in other spawns. I dont think any of us here want to keep rolling the dice on Spawn positions. It seems to make much more sense to do what the GSL map makers are doing, Specific map>>specific playstlyle. Crevasse=macro every game Twilight fortress= More rush oriented. So much better, so much more interesting, and so much more starcraft.
|
the 3rd and 4th look great!
|
On June 21 2011 01:19 Zaros wrote: Why does every blizzard map have a super hard to take 3rd base >.>
Thirds look fine to me, I'm more worried about a fourth. Taking a fourth base as protoss seems half impossible as ling runbys will rape unless you have some serious army splitting, which is not exactly the strong point of the protoss army. Looks like a 3 base heavy map pool to me. Still better than two though.
|
United States7166 Posts
well those gold expos are the reason why map 3's layout sucks, if they removed that, or shoved it more over to the outskirts, there'd be some nice areas to fight in and just make for an overall better map layout. i dont know why blizzard is so obsessed with having some maps have no wide open areas at all
|
|
|
|