|
On June 21 2011 10:09 sixdrumquads wrote:
until they let us see the sizes of the maps its too early to really call it, i like how the "rush map" has blockable areas so it isnt stupid hard to not rush, or defend the rush. with that map maybe make a wall there that cant be dropped on and move it over so you can wall you natural off if you are goign for a 1 rax, forge, ext ext fast expand.
if the maps are large enough and maybe some positions are switched once the community figures out what is working and what isnt i think these will be pretty solid maps
must be nice to beable to wall off...
|
These new 1v1 maps don't look that good to me, but time will tell how they will play out.
|
Blizzard claims to be wanting SC2 to succeed as an e-sport, but everything they are doing kind of goes against that idea. These maps are going to lead to short, boring games that not even tournaments will use. I think that this is bad and will cascade down future generations of SC players.
|
United States15 Posts
these look like terrible maps for zerg. the only race that can't as easily abuse "rush" strategies derp.
|
United States527 Posts
On June 21 2011 09:50 NATO wrote:
Much better than the last set. Hopefully they'll remove the least favorite maps (by people chosing to play on them) Delta Quadrant, Tal'darim, and slag pits. (in that order)
Whoa, I hope they don't listen to you (Tal'darim is good)
|
I dunno what's with the negativity, the maps look pretty decent to me. The first map might be a little small is my main concern. Either way, they don't seem like they're horribly imbalanced or will force early fights, so that works for me.
Nothing particularly exciting, but nothing particularly demoralizing either.
|
On June 21 2011 10:17 Exclamator wrote:
Blizzard claims to be wanting SC2 to succeed as an e-sport, but everything they are doing kind of goes against that idea. These maps are going to lead to short, boring games that not even tournaments will use. I think that this is bad and will cascade down future generations of SC players.
Maybe it's some kind of plot to ensure games of a very predictable time so it fits TV schedules! o.0
/conspiracy theories
I think it's much simpler, that HQ honestly believes that big maps limit options.
|
I wish Blizzard would put out little games played by there in house balancing team showing the maps being played so we could get a better feel for how they will work in practice.... instead of just attaching like 3 lines expaining the general idea of each map...
|
Yesss no rocks on the 1v1 macro map :D
The "rush map" actually seems fairly easy to defend if you put a few bunkers at the choke. There's not many rushes I can think of that can afford to bust the rocks. The gold expo needs those rocks gone tho. I always feel vulnerable when I move my army to atk the rocks >.>
Kerrigan's Wrath seems like Backwater all over again. Wayyyyy too many rocks. Imo it's a little imba for Terran too, since a good tank line could cover all of your rocks very well. I'm not saying to get rid of the easy 3rd, but get rid of the rocks that can be broken to access the 3rd.
Shifted Sky is great for the nat and main, but dat 3rd expo. Way too far away.
|
Maps are shit, swallow your fucking pride and use GSL maps.
I can't believe blizzard actually admits that they are only catering to the casuals in the link from the op, FUCK.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
Rocks must not be armored. So there will be no units with bonuses vs rocks.
|
They all look quite similar. I REALLY hope they add at least 1 GSL map so we don't have to watch GSL without actually having played on one of the maps.
|
blizz sure loves the gold bases... seriously, I think gold minerals have no place in competitive sc2.
|
I'm not sure where they get off saying that the fourth 1v1 map is a "macro map" with an easy first two expansions....... we'll see when they go live on the ladder, but I doubt that's how it will play out. It's just looking like another only of their regular 4 players maps. But of course, I can't tell just by looking at it, so again, we'll see.
|
All 4 of the maps look almost exactly the same wtf lol.
Can't they ever make a map with a moderately easy to take 3rd? It's always either impossible or straight up given to you. So dumb.
|
Hasn't blizzard said they don't mind all the pros tournaments playing on different maps?
I'm not sure why they should cater to pros on ladder, they all play amongst themselves anyway. And blizzard is correct in that mainly casuals will play and enjoy these maps.
|
How are these maps in any way better for casuals than Xelnaga Fortress, Bel'shir Beach or Dual Sight? I don't even understand Blizzards logic here, these maps invite hidden expansions as much as any GSL map O_o
|
Hmmm.... for some reason I like the third and fourth maps the most. But wouldn't they add at least one additional 1v1 map or something? O-o
|
Blizz! What do you have against people taking a 3rd? 
The maps keep improving though, I will give them that.
No 2 player map (there's only 2 ( i think) in the pool right now, and one of them is Crap station))
I can imagine the design process though:
"Hm, this map looks great! ...but its missing something... ah yes, destructible rocks! Let's lay 'em down everywhere :DDDDDDD"
|
They are all literally the same except with different skins and maybe the towers are in a different spot or gold 3rds are covered with rocks with alternative paths. What a fucking joke. The team maps are just bad and lazily designed as well. More shared bases maps? hahaha
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
