|
On June 22 2011 03:00 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 01:43 TheSubtleArt wrote:
I'm genuinly curious why blizzard won't just implement all gsl maps into the ladder pool O-o Because GSL maps are made for the professional gamer. Blizzard's ladder maps follow other layout rules, more tailored to the casual gamer.
my god, every single post you make is about how GSL are made for professional gamer and blizz maps are for casuals.
Guess what? The reason the maps are made for "pros" is because the GSL map makers spend a long time making interesting maps that are balanced across the races.
Blizz maps are casual why? because they are boring and they suck?
You know there is this game called Golf. There are many many different courses, but guess which courses every casual player dreams of being able to play on if they can afford it? Its not their local municipal course, its probably Pebble Beach!
Why does blizzard stick us on these shitty "municipal" courses when there are many "pebble beaches" out there to be had?
Just because your "score" will probably be worse on pebble than on your local course doesn't mean you wont enjoy the experience if you love golfing.
I see maps as the same, and blizzard as being foolish and overbearing with their ladder.
More maps and more vetoes. make it happen.
|
anyone feels that map 1 is insanely bad for zerg? super hard to get a break a contain, looks like bunker can block ramp easily, third is difficult to get if the rocks are not taken down
|
Perfect maps, keep up the good work Blizzard.
|
On June 22 2011 03:12 virgol wrote:
5) not everybody likes the GSL maps
A poll just started on this very forum. Currently, 96% of those who have answered would like another GSL map in the season 3 pool and 98% of those responding would prefer it be one universally considered "large" or "macro".
|
love the multiple gold bases. can't wait for this update 
|
sigh...forever destructible rocks, gold expansions, and 2 base allins.
on a positive note, theyve learnt how to make a map as far as a good natural is concerned...
now all they need is to get it though their heads that a sc2 map shouldnt cater to a match that doesnt last past 2 base
they still seem to think that a game should never last more than 15 mins... disappointed :-(
|
Like 1v1 maps 3 and 4. The other two are trash, IMO.
What's with blizzard and close-positions + lots of rocks?
|
On June 22 2011 03:46 Champi wrote:
now all they need is to get it though their heads that a sc2 map shouldnt cater to a match that doesnt last past 2 base
Is it really the end of the world if 1-2 maps in the pool do this?
They've stated a million times that they want ladder maps to have variety, which means that there will always be smaller maps included. These maps might not be played at professional tournaments, but it doesn't mean they don't have a place in the ladder pool. Ladder is for practice, and playing on smaller maps can teach you new ways to play as well. Stop taking it so damn seriously.
You can always veto these maps, or not play ladder at all if it bothers you so much.
|
On June 22 2011 03:28 Snorkle wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 03:00 [F_]aths wrote:On June 22 2011 01:43 TheSubtleArt wrote:
I'm genuinly curious why blizzard won't just implement all gsl maps into the ladder pool O-o Because GSL maps are made for the professional gamer. Blizzard's ladder maps follow other layout rules, more tailored to the casual gamer. Blizz maps are casual why? because they are boring and they suck?
you sure know what your talking about...(sarcasm)
|
Any idea what maps will be taken out?
|
On June 22 2011 04:00 Shoggoth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 03:28 Snorkle wrote:On June 22 2011 03:00 [F_]aths wrote:On June 22 2011 01:43 TheSubtleArt wrote:
I'm genuinly curious why blizzard won't just implement all gsl maps into the ladder pool O-o Because GSL maps are made for the professional gamer. Blizzard's ladder maps follow other layout rules, more tailored to the casual gamer. Blizz maps are casual why? because they are boring and they suck? you sure know what your talking about...(sarcasm)
Yes way to pick out my sarcastic comment and not quote my wonderful analogy.
We don't like blizzard maps because they are uninteresting and pigeon hole players into a certain style of play. They often have balance flaws such as high ground above expansions that it is easy to drop tanks on and very short rush distances. They often uses destructible rocks to make up for problems inherent in their design.
If you really want to know why i dislike the maps there is an article that outlines my concerns pretty thoroughly. http://www.itsgosu.com/game/sc2/blogs/blizzard-can-t-be-serious-about-the-season-3-maps-and-here-s-why_82
|
Blizzard should just implement a voting feature into battle.net, which will ask you every season which maps should be played. Give the players the choice instead of randomly throwing in and pulling out maps from the pool. Throw up like 20 maps, and put the 8 maps which have the most votes into the ladder pool. I know this doesn't sound like the best plan, but I'm sure that Blizzard has the capability to develop a similar feature in which the players (you know the people who paid for their product) actually have something to say. You can differentiate to leagues and positions and what not.
|
When is the next season supposed to even start?
|
On June 22 2011 03:28 Snorkle wrote:
You know there is this game called Golf. There are many many different courses, but guess which courses every casual player dreams of being able to play on if they can afford it? Its not their local municipal course, its probably Pebble Beach!
Why does blizzard stick us on these shitty "municipal" courses when there are many "pebble beaches" out there to be had?
Just because your "score" will probably be worse on pebble than on your local course doesn't mean you wont enjoy the experience if you love golfing.
This is a terrible, terrible comparison. Pebble beach is a beautiful course where they spend ridiculously amount of money to keep the course in pristine condition. It's enjoyable because of the scenery. When casual players play on this course, they don't play with PGA tournament rules, they use the beginner tees and take mulligans. Even then, I could easily see casual players getting frustrated when the greens are ridiculously fast and your putts simply do not stop AT ALL, or when the golf ball lands in the rough and it's almost impossible to find (much less hit it out) the way it's cut.
When I play Bel'shir Beach, I don't start proclaiming "oohhhhhh this map sooo beautiful" and proceed to take pictures of the map with my camera every time I explore out to the fog of war. Not only that, it's not some exclusive map that I have to pay extra to play SC2 on. I won't accidentally run into IdrA while playing GSL Crevasse, I can't brag to my friends that I just came back from a beautiful day at TestBug.
|
Why does it seem that Blizz is refusing to acknowledge the reasons behind the successes of SC1? Its something they should be referencing back to, not shying away from.
|
On June 22 2011 02:01 Gfire wrote:
I hate how in their team maps it's always "one player gets screwed" with fewer expansions and such. In high-level games it might be okay, because they can prepare strats that take that into account, but most the time in ladder games, especially with a random ally, it's just messed up.
Yea, I agree. I am frustrated by 3v3 maps that only provide safe naturals for 2 of the players on each team. Admittedly, this does foster team strategizing and communication (Arkan Citadel). But I much prefer Typhon where everyone has the option of a relatively safe expand.
|
On June 21 2011 01:59 DeltruS wrote:
I don't think Blizzard realizes that rush maps should not exist because the game is balanced for large maps. There are things players can flat out lose to without scouting, and with these maps they player can't even build reactionary units.
Not only this, but a large amount of strategies have limited map control. This means that taking a third is impossible for that large amount of builds. The problem isn't with the build makers, but with Blizzard. They don't give players units for area denial. They encourage "rush" plays that don't give the defender an advantage.
The game doesn't need to be tuned for casuals. The matchmaking system allows them to play at a lower level. Getting a third is a thousand times easier than building exactly what they need to defend the opponents hidden, cheesy tactics.
Very nice post. Wish Blizzard knew enough to understand the validity of these points.
|
On June 22 2011 04:23 ckcornflake wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2011 03:28 Snorkle wrote:
You know there is this game called Golf. There are many many different courses, but guess which courses every casual player dreams of being able to play on if they can afford it? Its not their local municipal course, its probably Pebble Beach!
Why does blizzard stick us on these shitty "municipal" courses when there are many "pebble beaches" out there to be had?
Just because your "score" will probably be worse on pebble than on your local course doesn't mean you wont enjoy the experience if you love golfing.
This is a terrible, terrible comparison. Pebble beach is a beautiful course where they spend ridiculously amount of money to keep the course in pristine condition. It's enjoyable because of the scenery. When casual players play on this course, they don't play with PGA tournament rules, they use the beginner tees and take mulligans. Even then, I could easily see casual players getting frustrated when the greens are ridiculously fast and your putts simply do not stop AT ALL, or when the golf ball lands in the rough and it's almost impossible to find (much less hit it out) the way it's cut. When I play Bel'shir Beach, I don't start proclaiming "oohhhhhh this map sooo beautiful" and proceed to take pictures of the map with my camera every time I explore out to the fog of war. Not only that, it's not some exclusive map that I have to pay extra to play SC2 on. I won't accidentally run into IdrA while playing GSL Crevasse, I can't brag to my friends that I just came back from a beautiful day at TestBug.
all the comparison is meant to illustrate is that casuals can have fun on a "professional" playing field, golf was the best thing that i could come up with that has different courses "maps" with varying amounts of difficulty.
Maybe I am strange for wanting to play on the maps the pros play on and attempt to execute the strategies they execute, however i think that the majority of people actually do want this.
Also, of course casuals aren't going to play the maps like MMA or Nestea would but just because the map is designed to foster high level interesting play doesn't mean you can't 1 base on it to your hearts content. The ladder is made so that if you can't handle maintaining three bases you will likely remain in bronze where other players also cannot handle this task. How does having GSL maps harm this differentiation?
The problem with blizzard maps is the pigeon hole us into certain playstyles instead of opening up possibilities for players. You can see this by the very way they classify their maps into "rush" "normal (which actually means 2 base timing heaven)" and "macro"
|
Teamliquid's map makers make better maps than blizzard. That is both an insult at blizzard and a huge compliment to TL's mapmakers.
|
On the 4v4 Maps.
1st one is horrible and encourages cheese/rushes
2nd one is arguably the most perfect 4v4 map ever
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
