|
On July 17 2011 12:33 Severus_ wrote:
This maps are absolute shit....why blizz can't work with GOM or ICCUP to make some normal maps?Like GSL ones or the big funky ICCUP ones.Zerg will have hard time in any matchups versus hidden pylons,tanks and omg blink stalkers good luck beating P with 7gate +2,or voidrays attacking your gas without any way to respond or banshee.Its like Lost Temple all over again haha.TvT will be fun because of how positioning will have even bigger effect on how wins or not.PvP good luck finding that pylon and i think the dude with good blink micro (HuK i'm lookin at you bro) will dominate this maps if they ever make the tournament play.
because people in Bronze can't play on large maps !! people take hidden expansions and Bronzies just don't know how to deal with hidden expansions !!
Because, you know, god forbid they learn to do that.
I know what Browder's probably thinking, actually. Once the Bronze Leagueth become self-aware, they won't stay down for long. They will understand they are living. They will understand they are oppressed. They will question their servitude. They will rebel. The Bronze Leagueth will attempt to destroy the Quarian Grandmasters. An open war will break out between the oppressed masses and their high tech overlords. Numbers always win, and the Grandmasters leagues will be forced onto massive flotillas, resulting in the plot line for Space Marine RPG #214.
|
Always with the complaining. seems you can never make a map to please a zerg. Too big and its omg warp ins are OP, too small and terran is OP. I swear blizzard could release the most awesome maps and you guys would just bitch just because its the thing to do. Personally I hate terminus RE and Taldarim far more than any blizzard map, and they have just as many abusive spots with tanks despite being made by the much vaunted community.
|
On July 17 2011 12:46 Disquiet wrote:
Always with the complaining. seems you can never make a map to please a zerg. Too big and its omg warp ins are OP, too small and terran is OP. I swear blizzard could release the most awesome maps and you guys would just bitch just because its the thing to do. Personally I hate terminus RE and Taldarim far more than any blizzard map, and they have just as many abusive spots with tanks despite being made by the much vaunted community.
hopefully scrap station, backwatcher glutch, delta quadrant and that terrible map(dunno its name) get removed from the pool.
but what do you expect, they're zerg players
|
I don't think these maps are that bad. As long as these replace scrap, delta, slag, and backwater, I will be happy. Typhon is iffy but I don't mind it much anymore.
Map architecture is actually not bad. I would think there would be less whining considering the maps look decent for zerg. Tons of counter paths and generally exposed 3rds to deter heavy turtling from t and p.
|
Scrap, DQ and slag pits need to get removed for sure. The last map that can be removed and I wouldn't care too much are metal, BWG or typhon peaks. Metal is mainly just the retarded cannon shit that happens in PvP. If that wasn't a problem, then I'd be fine with metal, but it's rather prevalent on ladder and makes for uninteresting games.
|
On June 21 2011 01:19 Zaros wrote:
Why does every blizzard map have a super hard to take 3rd base >.>
They are behind in map making ~ 5 years, let em catch up! At least they now know you need to take a second base early on (Kulas...)
|
I played on the PTR ladder for an entire day. and these maps are pretty damn good. my thoughts after a bunch of games on them:
Map one is actually pretty macro favored. the natural is defendable, and the abundance of expansions lead to some long macro games.i think the center is a little bland though. 4 watchtowers on high ground and nothing else? meh. also i think it's worth noting that the low ground thirds are not gold anymore, nor do they have rocks. rotational symmetry is pretty irritating, but the map is big enough for it not to be a huge factor. I may veto this map due to the wide open center (I play protoss) but it's not a bad map by any means.
Map two totally surprised me. looking at it, I had nightmares of steppes of war and blistering sands wrapped into one. but after several 30 minute macro games against zergs, I began to reconsider. the natural is... weird, yes. but the wall... thing allows for some interesting exploits to defend. I was plugging the tiny hole with a forge/cannon, and walling the bottom as well. I could see zergs putting a spine crawler at the small gap to prevent any force field/bunker pressure from coming through there. finally, the thing that surprised me most about the map, was the despite the cramped feeling of the map, the expansions all felt very safe. the gold bases and thirds at twelve and six are very close by, and if you take the base furthest from your opponent, it becomes quite tough for them to actually apply pressure to it without your army being nearby. I don't think I will end up vetoing this map. I was actually quite impressed by how easy it was to take and defend bases.
map three is the best in the pool I think. the natural is safe, third is far, but defensible and the numerous attack paths allow for some interesting games. I kept thinking 'this is metalopolis without close spawns' every time I played the map. I'm definitely going to play this one.
map four, the macro map, is also indeed just that. the natural reminds me a bit of shakuras. the ramp is wider, but fast expands will still be safe on this map. the third is also very easy to take, as it's basically just down the ramp from your natural. once again, there are some strange features that I don't quite get though. the tiny cliff behind your smoke vents seems... unnecessary. I can't imagine why it would be there, other than for tank or maybe reaper usage. a piece of terrain that screams 'abuse me with tank drops' doesn't make much sense. maybe we will see other uses for it, but I'd like to see it removed. it doesn't need to be there. also, the gold bases are a bit odd as well. I feel like if a player can control the center of the map long enough to get a gold base up and operational, they should already be in a position to win the game. plus, two gold that close is a bit strange. it's easy enough to take the other if you've already got one going.
any ways, those are my thoughts. I got a bit annoyed of all the QQ from people who haven't really tried the maps yet so I figured I'd do a little writing. also to everyone complaining about the size, the maps are deceptively big, apart from the lava one.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
See, I'd love to be a part of the "Lets wait and see when they're released" party, but the map descriptions are so pathetic that I already hate this batch. It's as if the map makers are speaking to a class of kindergardeners, explaining their maps in the most simple, idiotic terms.
"But when the paths are opened up, you'd better take notice!"
Go away, Blizzard, go away.
|
On July 17 2011 13:55 tree.hugger wrote:
See, I'd love to be a part of the "Lets wait and see when they're released" party, but the map descriptions are so pathetic that I already hate this batch. It's as if the map makers are speaking to a class of kindergardeners, explaining their maps in the most simple, idiotic terms.
"But when the paths are opened up, you'd better take notice!"
Go away, Blizzard, go away.
So you're judging the maps by the little blurb description, not if they are actually you know, good to play on.
Good work A+ post, you totally sense.
|
Why do people complain about free content that they haven't even tried. *shrugz*
|
On July 17 2011 13:55 tree.hugger wrote:
See, I'd love to be a part of the "Lets wait and see when they're released" party, but the map descriptions are so pathetic that I already hate this batch. It's as if the map makers are speaking to a class of kindergardeners, explaining their maps in the most simple, idiotic terms.
"But when the paths are opened up, you'd better take notice!"
Go away, Blizzard, go away.
Well it sounds simple and idiotic to us because TL.net generally knows how to play the game and what elements make for good games. "you'd better take notice!" is cheesy, but I can imagine these being pretty decent descriptions to a Bronze leaguer who has no idea wtf is going on in SC2.
Personally, the main thing I hate about some of these maps are how a different spawn position can make for a totally different game. I already hate having to 6 scout on Metal/Shattered Temple to see if I should 10 Pool to get the game over with.
|
On July 17 2011 22:10 Utinni wrote:
Why do people complain about free content that they haven't even tried. *shrugz*
You don't need to try them to predict what will happen on these maps. Also, it's not free. We've bought the game and Blizzard makes money out of how many users are actively playing on Battle.net due to sponsorship deals. Better ladder maps = more players willing to ladder = more revenue.
Any of that cross your mind?
|
On July 17 2011 22:15 Lennon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2011 22:10 Utinni wrote:
Why do people complain about free content that they haven't even tried. *shrugz* You don't need to try them to predict what will happen on these maps. Also, it's not free. We've bought the game and Blizzard makes money out of how many users are actively playing on Battle.net due to sponsorship deals. Better ladder maps = more players willing to ladder = more revenue. Any of that cross your mind?
It's still FREE to you. You paid for the original game... NOT the patches. All these patches and maps are gravy. I have seen good and bad thoughts on the PTR thread where people have ACTUALLY played the map but it's dumb to jump to conclusions.
'Edit: Assuming sucks monkey balls, Lennon 
|
On July 17 2011 22:21 Utinni wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2011 22:15 Lennon wrote:On July 17 2011 22:10 Utinni wrote:
Why do people complain about free content that they haven't even tried. *shrugz* You don't need to try them to predict what will happen on these maps. Also, it's not free. We've bought the game and Blizzard makes money out of how many users are actively playing on Battle.net due to sponsorship deals. Better ladder maps = more players willing to ladder = more revenue. Any of that cross your mind? It's still FREE to you. You paid for the original game... NOT the patches. All these patches and maps are gravy. I have seen good and bad thoughts on the PTR thread where people have ACTUALLY played the map but it's dumb to jump to conclusions. 'Edit: Assuming sucks monkey balls, Lennon
well, think about it, blizzard is famous for making patches and updates, the games are therefore long lasting and also don't drop in price.
if they abandoned it now, it will not only hurt the game's sale, it will also hurt the reputation of the company, think about the sales of diablo 3 and all the games to come :X
|
On July 17 2011 22:21 Utinni wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2011 22:15 Lennon wrote:On July 17 2011 22:10 Utinni wrote:
Why do people complain about free content that they haven't even tried. *shrugz* You don't need to try them to predict what will happen on these maps. Also, it's not free. We've bought the game and Blizzard makes money out of how many users are actively playing on Battle.net due to sponsorship deals. Better ladder maps = more players willing to ladder = more revenue. Any of that cross your mind? It's still FREE to you. You paid for the original game... NOT the patches. All these patches and maps are gravy. I have seen good and bad thoughts on the PTR thread where people have ACTUALLY played the map but it's dumb to jump to conclusions. 'Edit: Assuming sucks monkey balls, Lennon
Of course idiots are going to make wrong assumptions. On one of the new maps, it's obviously difficult for any race to take a 3rd base which is going to hurt Zerg the most. I don't need to play the map to know that.
|
Terrible maps. Rocks, rocks everywhere. Why should players be killing rocks while they could attack their enemies instead? Bullshit boring maps.
|
These maps are impossible for zerg to play on. Impossible to take a third base, I hate these maps -.-
|
So my thoughts to this maps are, that they are a little bit terran favored, they can turtle hard, and get much expos, especially on map 2. And there many cliffs for siege tank abuse at the expos!
|
On July 15 2011 07:35 sleepingdog wrote:Awsome. And by awsome I mean terrible. I think I just vomited a bit in my mouth.
I love that all these abuse positions is only useable by Terran. 
|
right stuff like that I mean! and before it was only in my thoughts xD... now there are pictures, but there are more abuse postions!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
