| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
iNbluE
Switzerland674 Posts
On June 21 2011 04:37 Kadyn wrote: Am I the only one that thinks of Slag Pits upon looking at Shifted Sky (map #3 in 1v1) ? Nope  I think it's probably gonna replace it. Oh well, a veto for a veto...Don't like these maps at all except maybe for no. 4 | ||
|
Shalaiyn
Netherlands2735 Posts
Rotational symmetry, especially in the 1st map... ugh | ||
|
GreatOldOne
101 Posts
| ||
|
Meteora.GB
Canada2479 Posts
| ||
|
rbx270j
Canada540 Posts
| ||
|
Tsuki.eu
Portugal1049 Posts
| ||
|
Chessz
United States644 Posts
| ||
|
Shalaiyn
Netherlands2735 Posts
On June 21 2011 04:48 Tsuki.eu wrote: i want to know wich ones they will remove:> Metalopolis, Tal'darim, Shakuras. You heard it here first boys. | ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
On June 21 2011 04:49 Shalaiyn wrote: Metalopolis, Tal'darim, Shakuras. You heard it here first boys. Don't talk like that. T_T | ||
|
Dice17
United States520 Posts
| ||
|
thOr6136
Slovenia1775 Posts
| ||
|
Polygamy
Austria1114 Posts
| ||
|
Coutcha
Canada519 Posts
hate that shitttt | ||
|
genius_man16
United States749 Posts
On June 21 2011 04:49 Shalaiyn wrote: Metalopolis, Tal'darim, Shakuras. You heard it here first boys. You joke but I can see them doing it. God, I almost hope they do so they can have shit thrown in their faces for months. Then maybe they'll implement good maps (GSL, ICCUP, etc) Edit: Actually I don't see them ever getting rid of Metalopolis. I mean it was in the initial release of the game and even most tournaments still seem to use it so they're probably pretty pleased with how it's turned out. But who knows, maybe they aren't very attached to their maps, lol. | ||
|
wireke
Belgium122 Posts
| ||
|
-Zoda-
France3578 Posts
| ||
|
Omlas
Hungary43 Posts
| ||
|
arthurrr157
United States118 Posts
| ||
|
shmoo
United States139 Posts
I like some of the ideas that Blizzard is experimenting with, but I feel that each of these maps has some serious issues. First Map What I like about the first map is the use of destructible rocks at the natural. There are two sets of them with the first set hugging the wall close to the third and the second set at the entrance to the natural. What I do not like about this map is a much longer list. The distance between the ramp and the natural is large and reminds me of Backwater Gulch before the ramp was adjusted. The third is extremely positionally imbalanced. It looks close enough to be sieged from the main. There is also a cliff right above the 3rd mineral line which terran can too easily abuse against both zerg and protoss. The towers in the center provide too much vision and nearly shutdown any kind of counter attack or flanking path. There is one choke for the natural and the third allowing terran to easily defend all three bases or easily siege all three bases. Imagine a terran slow pushing from the center towards your nat and 3rd. They have the towers to grant vision and fall back to. They can easily shut down mining on your third. I imagine this map will be an auto veto for zerg and that protoss will strongly dislike facing terran here. Second Map What I like about the second map is the kind of easy to take third. I cannot tell if that high ground by the third is accessible from the ground or only by air. If it is not accessible ground, then it will be abused by terran like Lost Temple. Since it is at a third though, both zerg and protoss will have plenty of time to be able to deal with it. What I do not like about this map is how small it is. Each base is just too close to every other spawn. Even cross position seems super close from nat to nat. There is only one open area and its right in the middle. The problem with the middle of the map is the tower granting vision of the entire middle and all of the tall grass. What was Blizzard trying to accomplish here? All the grass would make it ideal for counter attacks and flanks, but the tower grants vision of four of the six attack paths. It would seem that moving out into the middle of the map is very dangerous because of the grass. Third Map What I like about the third map is the natural. The ramp is reasonably close to the nat and the choke appears to be a good size. It will probably be too easy for protoss to forcefield the ramp, so zerg and terran will need to engage protoss further away from the nat. I like that there are a lot of open areas and counter attack paths. The bases do not seem too close to each other by ground. Close by air spawns will be similar to Shattered Temple and Metalopolis in game play. The third base is pretty difficult to take safely as any race and is very dependent on spawn positions. The gold is too difficult to hold, due to the 360 degrees of attack. I think it will be incredibly difficult for terran and protoss to go beyond three base. Taking a fourth and fifth just stretch you out so thin. Fourth Map The fourth map us very interesting and I think I will have to play with it for awhile to get a good feeling for it. The natural is very easy to take for all three races, it reminds of the nat on Shakuras. The third is easier to take than on Shakuras, but harder to defend. If you spawn cross positions, it seems rather difficult to obtain a fourth. The gold bases are extremely vulnerable as well, the most vulnerable yet I think. There are some serious positional imbalances as well. Imagine both of you spawn on the left side. The main seems way close to that third. You may be able to siege the gas, or at the very least provide cover for marines that area being dropped there. In a PvZ situation, the protoss could deny the third with VR and phoenix since it is so close. Its so close you may be able to even nuke. Overall I just hope they replace DQ, SS, and Slag Pits so I have three new vetoes to use on these maps. I just do not understand Blizzard's map philosophy. They say they want a wide variety of maps so people can rush or macro and they can veto the maps they do not want to play. They say they will not implement GSL maps straight up because of how GSL maps change things like mineral and gas counts. They say those changes make it confusing for low end players. Well those low end players can veto those maps if they want. Bilzz can even put a disclaimer on them saying these maps are not for the timid. I am excited to see some map changes coming down the tube, but it looks like I would veto the first map, the second map, and the fourth map. | ||
|
DNB
Finland995 Posts
On the other hand, I'm happy they are not putting any Tal'Darim copies in. That map is so zerg favoured in TvZ it's not even funny | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
CSO Contender
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
