Season 3 Ladder Pool Updates - Page 33

On June 21 2011 08:41 a176 wrote:


... where's the third?

On June 21 2011 08:43 Belial88 wrote:
Why do they put rocks at the third base always? Are they afraid you will hurt yourself since taking a third before 50ish supply hurts you anyways?

On June 21 2011 08:51 Doodsmack wrote:
Keep in mind that Zergs and Protosses were claiming Shakuras was going to be a terrible map when they saw the first pictures of it (and before they played it). This is because it was clearly possible to siege 3 different bases from each of the watch towers. So it should be expected that the amount of QQ in this thread will be unreasonable.

On June 21 2011 08:47 shmoo wrote:


Only Blizzard knows. It only hurts one race. Both Terran and Protoss are usually able to destroy rocks very quickly when they want a third, or well before they want a third. There are also plenty of strats that Terran and Protoss can do in reaction to a fast third.

On June 21 2011 08:19 Mauldo wrote:


^^ I like this way more than separating the leagues by map pools. It's gets too complicated for people when they upgrade from Platinum and suddenly have to acclimate to new maps. That's not far to anyone at all.

Also, did anyone read what Blizzard wrote at the end of the blog post?



The reason why they add these maps and won't "add normal and macro maps to help people get better at the game" is because they know their fan base, and they know that most people aren't necessarily looking to get better. They're looking to play how they want, and so Blizzard caters to them. If that makes them an evil corporation, then damn. I know of a few American companies that bought up the housing market debt, and when it all defaulted, used the government payouts to give themselves hundreds of millions worth of bonuses. But that's on the same level of giving people varied maps on the ladder, right?

They said it right here guys. If you're pissy about people cheesing and rushing on the ladder, then you'll have to suck it up. Sorry. I can't beat them, but you don't see me on here advocating that Blizzard add maps that only I would like to play.

And these maps look okay, but I haven't played on them, so I'm not going to shit on any of them like so many of my forum brethren have. I'll say that they look decent. They're not GSL maps, which I almost uniformly love, but I'm sure they'll give most of the players (including myself) some fun games. And that's what Blizzard is in the business of, giving the most people at the same time as much fun as they can. So kudos.

On June 21 2011 08:53 Falcor wrote:


Shakuras was a terrible map...so much so that it got reworked? And even still most zerg dont like it because of the 1 attack path down the mid.

On June 21 2011 08:43 Belial88 wrote:
Why do they put rocks at the third base always? Are they afraid you will hurt yourself since taking a third before 50ish supply hurts you anyways?

On June 21 2011 08:51 Doodsmack wrote:
Keep in mind that Zergs and Protosses were claiming Shakuras was going to be a terrible map when they saw the first pictures of it (and before they played it). This is because it was clearly possible to siege 3 different bases from each of the watch towers. So it should be expected that the amount of QQ in this thread will be unreasonable.

On June 21 2011 01:24 neobowman wrote:
Notice how new Blizzard maps aren't being used in GSL? I think tournaments should stop using ladder maps.

I knew you would provide us with some more ignorance. You fail to understand the context of the discussion and instead retort like some 12 year old boy who got his feelings hurt. Right off the bat I notice that you failed to read let alone comprehend what I posted. I said that cheese WAS viable and good in a best out of X. I said cheese was a waste of time on the ladder due to how easy it is to execute. People are better off playing longer games if they are looking to improve.

Now we were talking about why Blizzard doesn't help all of their players out by giving them "normal" and "macro" maps instead of all of these "rush" maps. You came up with some ideological fallacy that we have to have "rush" and "macro" maps in order to have a choice. That is simply not true. You can do super aggressive play on large maps such as Tal Darim, Crevasse, and Terminus. Just because a map is large and macro oriented, does not prevent there from being cheese or all ins. This also applies to "normal" maps like Xel Naga Caverns and Metalopolis.

I provided a pretty clear example that illustrates the points I am trying to make. If you play Terran and every single one of your TvZ games are on Metalopolis close position, you can easily do a marine + scv all in every single game and have a very high win rate against zerg. You may even find that fun. What won't happen is any macro games what so ever. You will not learn how to properly macro, scout, multi task, harass aka learn to play the game. So when you get cross position or play on a map like Tal Darim, you will have no idea how to play.

Now say we flip this scenario a little bit. Say you are Terran and every game you play against Zerg is cross position or close by air on Metalopolis. You can still do a marine + scv all in, and it will still win sometimes. You are going to win a lot less than on close positions though. Due to the drop in win percentage, you try other things. You learn to expand, to macro, to scout, etc. Now you can still save that marine + scv all in for the right time, but you also know how to play the game.

Again we move to the next poor idea you have, because you fail to understand the context. Somebody else was talking about how difficult the third is to take on the third map. You stated that protoss would never four gate against a third base. I was simply providing an example that proved you were wrong. I at no point said anything about being tricked by a nexus cancel. This argument is about current common responses and current common builds applied to the new maps.

Now obviously any player worth their salt knows that you cannot use the same opening or strategy on each map. When new maps come out and people are trying to figure how to play on them, we have to start from somewhere. One of the best things to do with new maps is to sit down and figure out how you are going to get a 3rd base. Another great thing to do is try and take a safe build from a similar map and see if it works on the new map. So the fact that protoss can 4gate and 6 gate on any map is very relevant to this discussion. It is perfectly reasonable to take these new maps, imagine trying current builds on various spawn positions, and think about what would happen. People expressing concern over the close spawn positions is totally valid. It will be very difficult to take a 3rd in that situation.

Now the last block of text you posted really has me confused. It comes across like you were somehow upset by a post by a stranger on the internet about a game. I really hope that is not the case. If it is pm me and we can talk about a hug for you.