|
On June 21 2011 02:05 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +This means that the map won’t be strictly about the rush, even though it’s a rush map.
Hey zergs you wont strictly lose on this map, but your going to lose on this map.
I honestly think blizzard is trolling with this. There is no way in hell that they are this stupid. No way.
Watch them take out Metal/Xnc/Tal'Darim. I will never ladder again. It's quite a misconception that Zergs NEED 1 base ahead. It fits a defensive style yes, but Zergs can be aggressive too on equal base. Anyways, I think it's a little funny how they call them "Rush", "normal", and "Macro" maps. I mean yes, they make sense, even though a more accurate term for the Rush maps would be "Aggressive Maps", but they call the first one Normal but say it is still a rush map? Basically this supports one of my theories that whoever describes the maps is different than the ones who make them, or they make a lot of communication errors.
I'm thinking the Zerg mantra of 1 base ahead is outdated. They do need to get at least one macro hatch if they are on even bases.
|
I don't understand whats wrong with having more than 2 bases? Does a map have to be considered "macro" for it to be able to go further than 15minutes?
|
On June 21 2011 01:14 leecH wrote:
awesome. safe froge first expand on two of those 1v1 maps agaist zergies :D
also the first one: the rocks you have to kill if you want to have a good concave attack the natural early on. could be lot´s of fun those maps! :D
Didnt we learn in the GSL that there isnt a safe Forge first expand if the Zerg is prepared for it?
|
I only looked at the 1v1 and 2v2 maps, but they are definitely the best maps that Blizzard has made so far, just from the first glance.
Also, does the second 2v2 map look like a 2v2 version of Odd-Eye to anyone else?
|
What I would expect out of Blizzard for a good 1on1 map pool are some plain and simple boring midrange maps. But what they deliver are always some gimmicky maps with stupid expansion patterns. I will wait to play on those maps to make a final judgment but I am not very thrilled to ladder on those maps to say the least.
|
Why cant they take maps that have already been proven to work in tournaments etc... all these rocks, golds and close rush distances and weird and hard to take 3rd bases really suck, i really want another veto 
|
I'm thinking the Zerg mantra of 1 base ahead is outdated. They do need to get at least one macro hatch if they are on even bases.
Yup, that is a good point. The reason why you "need" 1 base ahead is not actually because you need more income, but because it gives you more larvae and is convenient to just add drones there when you want to pump econ instead of building a hatch in base and building another to expand later.
|
nothing convincing here
|
absolutely no idea how balanced these maps will be, but thank god they're not ugly (like slag + typhon). Although that first 4v4 map is kinda plain.
Really like the look of the 1v1 maps though. ^^
|
Guys, before the terrible nerdrage lets see how the maps work out.
I still remember on how people called some very solid maps terrible before games were played on them.Anyways I wish Blizz would include more GSL maps but I guess they don´t want to be seen as abusing the map makers or something
|
I'm anticipating the maps that will be removed far more than these maps that are getting added, they are pretty bad.....
|
On June 21 2011 02:18 windsupernova wrote:
Guys, before the terrible nerdrage lets see how the maps work out.
I still remember on how people called some very solid maps terrible before games were played on them.Anyways I wish Blizz would include more GSL maps but I guess they don´t want to be seen as abusing the map makers or something
Are you saying that XNC is in fact not terrible? I mean, have you seen the natural? It's so wide.
|
Hopefully they replace DQ, Scrap station, Slag pits, and Backwater gulch. I can hope, right?
|
3rd map looks pretty, I don't recall playing on an ice texture map yet
|
The first new 4v4 map looks pretty similar to District 10. I hope it doesn't lag my computer as much. Does anyone know if there is a way to tell how big these maps are?
|
Heard a lot about breaking rocks to take expansions lol. Why don't they add in the accelerated geysers?
Can't wait toplay on the ice terrain 
|
On June 21 2011 02:21 eloist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2011 02:18 windsupernova wrote:
Guys, before the terrible nerdrage lets see how the maps work out.
I still remember on how people called some very solid maps terrible before games were played on them.Anyways I wish Blizz would include more GSL maps but I guess they don´t want to be seen as abusing the map makers or something Are you saying that XNC is in fact not terrible? I mean, have you seen the natural? It's so wide.
Haha, so true
(I hope that was a parody)
Edit:
OH YEAH! I love the visuals on the 3rd map, hurray for a snow/bright map!
|
I'd like to see something like crossfire or at least something that isn't like metal with slight variations. Korean BW maps were amazing and i think blizzard could learn a lot by delving back into them.
|
On June 21 2011 02:17 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +I'm thinking the Zerg mantra of 1 base ahead is outdated. They do need to get at least one macro hatch if they are on even bases. Yup, that is a good point. The reason why you "need" 1 base ahead is not actually because you need more income, but because it gives you more larvae and is convenient to just add drones there when you want to pump econ instead of building a hatch in base and building another to expand later.
There aren't a whole lot of cost effective units in the zerg arsenal (I count one, the infestor, and only if the fungal hits), hence the need for greater income.
|
I don't really like them, too many rocks/vision blockers, the first map is just horrible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
