| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On November 05 2014 23:59 TheDwf wrote: Polt didn't play Classic on Catallena. You probably refer to MMA vs StarDust. Aaaah, sorry my mistake, it's early. Yes, MMA vs. StarDust. I'm still curious why Stardust didn't veto that map. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:00 DinoMight wrote: Aaaah, sorry my mistake, it's early. Yes, MMA vs. StarDust. I'm still curious why Stardust didn't veto that map. Fom memory he vetoed Merry | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
I'd rather play a Terran on Merry than Catallena anyday, especially with those airspace limiting things. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
Terran has been kind of stomping lately. I think the general public is more okay with it because of how weak Terran was at the beginning of the year, but ideally we'd like to have a balanced game and put past imbalances aside. Too many times people bring up past examples of imbalance not to demonstrate ways that problems were fixed but rather as an excuse for why current imbalance is acceptable. Right now Terran has one viable opening vs. Protoss - Reaper expand into bio. This obviously is causing huge issues with the matchup especially given the layout of some of these maps... maps like Nimbus, Catallena, Deadwing where the distance between the main and 3rd/4th is extremely short by air and extremely long by ground. We saw Classic abuse the shit out of the Terrain on Nimbus against Polt this weekend. The easy to abuse Terrain combined with very predictable openings (Reaper or nothing into Bio, both of which are countered by Colossus) are causing a lot of trouble for Terran. Mass Bio+Medivac is actually really boring to watch as well. jokes aside, I really think we need to wait til the end of 2015 s1 to have legitimate claims on balance as maps are a bit weird right now, there's 2 3players maps, both extremely open, and 1 with huge airspace, next to the abomination that is deadwing. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:02 DinoMight wrote: I'd rather play a Terran on Merry than Catallena anyday, especially with those airspace limiting things. Again from memory, Classic vetoed Catallena and San vetoed Nimbus. Since there are several maps that offer good drop opportunities - all except Overgrowth actually - I guess it comes down to personal preference and preparation (e. g. Classic and San had prepared a 2b all-in for respectively Nimbus and Catallena). herO vetoed Nimbus against Bbyong in the WECG, and Stats too against TY. Sora had vetoed Catallena against TY. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:06 Meavis wrote: jokes aside, I really think we need to wait til the end of 2015 s1 to have legitimate claims on balance as maps are a bit weird right now, there's 2 3players maps, both extremely open, and 1 with huge airspace, next to the abomination that is deadwing. Haha. Though it would be funnier if Terran was losing more :/ Classic played pretty well vs. Polt and utilized some very unorthodox strategies to win (Colossus drop on Nimbus, Phoenix HT build on that last map). He's been a bag-o-tricks kind of player, which is definitely a style of Protoss that is viable. But when the tricks run out, is it still possible to play standard and win? Stardust won game 1 because MMA expected cheese and meta'd too hard (he said this in his post game interview). Once MMA realized Stardust was playing standard he completely annihilated him. I'd hate for the game to get into a state where cheese and one-off builds are the only way Protoss can reliably beat Terran. Not only does it ruin the public's perception of the Protoss race (because they can't win except with gimmicky play and cheeses but at the same time, when they do win, it is written off as gimmicky cheese) but it gives a huge advantage to a Terran who just sits back macros and plays a safe game. Reminds me of WoL PvZ where Z knew that if it survived the soul train/3 base Colo allins they'd win on Infestor BL. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:06 Meavis wrote: jokes aside, I really think we need to wait til the end of 2015 s1 to have legitimate claims on balance as maps are a bit weird right now, there's 2 3players maps, both extremely open, and 1 with huge airspace, next to the abomination that is deadwing. As a map maker, what makes you have that stance on Deadwing? (Genuine question, no trap intended.) | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:18 TheDwf wrote: As a map maker, what makes you have that stance on Deadwing? (Genuine question, no trap intended.) Well since you ask here is my feedback on why I don't like it: PvT: drops from the 4th (behind the rocks) to the main are extremely annoying to deal with but even if the Protoss prepares there is that side terrain that Terran can retreat to. The distance by air vs. distance by ground is too skewed IMO. Same with trying to defend the 3rd and the main. Your 3rd mineral line can be hit from the ground on the other side of the cliff with a fairly easy retreat path. Meanwhile all Zealot harass opportunities (other than in the main base) are along the Terran's natural reinforcement path due to how the bases are positioned. So the harass guerilla warfare style Protoss is very hard to play on that map and you can't pull your opponent back as much with harass. PvZ: bases are so easy to take. Every Zerg goes fast 3 hatch but there is only one entrance into the Zerg. So they can defend all three bases from that one ramp. Games on this map usually result in all 4 bases being taken very quickly. So there's less skirmishing around the map and more deathball play which people don't like. Also, as a Protoss once you've taken the first 4 bases, taking the rest can be hard. This isn't usually a complaint (5th bases being hard to take) but because of the EASE of securing the first 4 the 5/6th bases often come into play, moreso than on other maps. PvP: I think the map is alright on 1-2 bases but once you have 2 bases a 3rd and 4th are extremely easy. So you go from a game in which almost every opener is viable with a lot of action to suddenly both players turtling on their 4 bases until max vs max. This is why I personally don't like it. Is my experience necessarily the same as that of pros? No. But I've definitely seen all these things happen at the pro level. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:18 TheDwf wrote: As a map maker, what makes you have that stance on Deadwing? (Genuine question, no trap intended.) This is my personal opinion, there are others with a dislike of it as well but from what I understand for different reasons. Simply put the map has no objectives or space to conquer at all, the map consists out of what are pretty much 4 corners, where every corner has a plentora of resources. this makes for some of the most incredibly dull and boring play (unless you like to see deathball clashes, MMA/forGG was a great example for that I gues?) with the objective of the game being to defeat your opponent, and the most effective way of doing so is through winning the deathball fight and then crushing your opponent, the only thing stopping you is limited resources, but with a plentora of those, games on deadwing tend to become very one dimensional. even the attack paths on the map are extremely lacking, the open plain in the middle being almost the only one being used. this all together makes the map extremely poor designed from a gameplay perspective imo. I mean, you can defend up to 4 bases parking your army at your front door+some drop defense, and even a 5th with it if you're willing to walk just a little. edit: I may or may not have put this badly with the example of a game like MMA/forGG | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:28 Meavis wrote: This is my personal opinion, there are others with a dislike of it as well but from what I understand for different reasons. Simply put the map has no objectives or space to conquer at all, the map consists out of what are pretty much 4 corners, where every corner has a plentora of resources. this makes for some of the most incredibly dull and boring play (unless you like to see deathball clashes, MMA/forGG was a great example for that I gues?) with the objective of the game being to defeat your opponent, and the most effective way of doing so is through winning the deathball fight and then crushing your opponent, the only thing stopping you is limited resources, but with a plentora of those, games on deadwing tend to become very one dimensional. even the attack paths on the map are extremely lacking, the open plain in the middle being almost the only one being used. this all together makes the map extremely poor designed from a gameplay perspective imo. Yup basically my thoughts exactly. 4 very easy to take bases and 1 way to get to your opponent. I like to play LiquidHero style where you harass your opponent to death all game long and macro behind it but that map just forces you to deathball or allin early. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:28 Meavis wrote: This is my personal opinion, there are others with a dislike of it as well but from what I understand for different reasons. Simply put the map has no objectives or space to conquer at all, the map consists out of what are pretty much 4 corners, where every corner has a plentora of resources. this makes for some of the most incredibly dull and boring play (unless you like to see deathball clashes, MMA/forGG was a great example for that I gues?) with the objective of the game being to defeat your opponent, and the most effective way of doing so is through winning the deathball fight and then crushing your opponent, the only thing stopping you is limited resources, but with a plentora of those, games on deadwing tend to become very one dimensional. even the attack paths on the map are extremely lacking, the open plain in the middle being almost the only one being used. this all together makes the map extremely poor designed from a gameplay perspective imo. I mean, you can defend up to 4 bases parking your army at your front door+some drop defense, and even a 5th with it if you're willing to walk just a little. edit: I may or may not have put this badly with the example of a game like MMA/forGG Thanks! I guess the map was made by the same person who made Entombed Valley. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:42 TheDwf wrote: Thanks! I guess the map was made by the same person who made Entombed Valley. Entombed is a Blizzard Map. (in case you are serious  ) | ||
|
SatedSC2
England3012 Posts
| ||
|
Enigmasc
United Kingdom147 Posts
since youll be waitting for ultras+ chitinous plating a lot longer than when you can get your infestors out etc honestly im hoping ZvP gets a good look at in lotv, something to make zerg more stable than just midgame timings into SH, muta switches get a lil boring when you have that option + roach hydra viper timings at most and it pigeon-holes both zerg and protoss a little too much honestly im hoping for some big changes in all the matchups but i suppose this isnt the right place to talk about it here XD | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:59 SatedSC2 wrote: Entombed is nowhere near as bad as Deadwing. You only had three easy bases, there were more ways to attack your opponent, and the map wasn't anywhere near as big. Why do your commemts about maps always coincide with how well Sentry/Immortal does on them? No hard feelings, I'm just teasing and agree that Entombed wasn't bad. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
On November 06 2014 00:42 TheDwf wrote: Thanks! I guess the map was made by the same person who made Entombed Valley. the difference being that, entombed had only 3 bases per corner and 1 seperating each segment. on top of that the natural alone had a relatively wide ramp, the route towards the 3rd that wasn't out in the open was blocked by rocks, and in order to take it fast you pretty much had to defend both 1 big choke at the natural and an average sized at the 3rd. if you were to take a 4th base you would be spread even more thin, same applies to the 5th base, every base had a form of risk/reward, while deadwing, compared, has minimal. that doesn't take away that entombed was horrible in some form (mostly the giant flat plain that was the middle) | ||
|
parkufarku
882 Posts
On November 05 2014 09:10 TheDwf wrote: Cute. Unfortunately all I have to do is link this post and any credibility you might painfully try to rebuild for the next few years instantly shatters. Rebuild? Unfortunate? Thanks for trying but no. That post is still my opinion, and I would post it again and again, minus the storm part (which I admitted in earlier posts that was too much of a stretch). The changes are substantial but necessary, given the extreme imbalanced state that Terran is in at the moment. It's you who've lost all credibility by passionately denying Terran is overpowered at this state of game over and over in every single posts you made throughout the years. It's honestly a joke, Terran can start with 3 Command Centers and you'll somehow try to justify it's balanced, with the way you have been posting. Why am I not surprised at the people who quoted your post via dismissing my changes with extreme reactions are all Terran icons? You guys are like rats You've already lost all credibility on TL. Let's dig up some of your posts shall we? Guy complains about WM in PvT forcing P to get early detection, then you ultimately try to play it off by "Stargate is viable.": + Show Spoiler + Cherry-picking stats as usual "based on the TvZ games I saw this month" + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/255254-designated-balance-discussion-thread?page=1122#22423 Adovocates Templar openings were abandoned because other builds were viable. Then gets called out for terrible argument + cherry-picking the data as usual. + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/461434-balance-test-map-soon-july-8th?page=23#454 Let's not forget your own changes to an already strong Terran: + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460770-terran-buffs-balance-testing-soon-july-1?page=34#675 What a joke. You should not be able to post anything Starcraft-related. You always advocate for Terran, even when they during the times when they are broken, and then try to backup your data by cherry-picking. It's almost getting worse than Avilo's infamous T bias. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On November 06 2014 01:27 parkufarku wrote: Why am I not surprised at the people who quoted your post via dismissing my changes with extreme reactions are all Terran icons? You guys are like rats Yeah, but we're cool rats. We actually play saxophone and stuff. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/378922Rat.jpg) Aren't we cute? | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On November 06 2014 01:27 parkufarku wrote: Rebuild? Unfortunate? Thanks for trying but no. That post is still my opinion, and I would post it again and again, minus the storm part (which I admitted in earlier posts that was too much of a stretch). The changes are substantial but necessary, given the extreme imbalanced state that Terran is in at the moment. It's you who've lost all credibility by passionately denying Terran is overpowered at this state of game over and over in every single posts you made throughout the years. It's honestly a joke, Terran can start with 3 Command Centers and you'll somehow try to justify it's balanced, with the way you have been posting. Why am I not surprised at the people who quoted your post via dismissing my changes with extreme reactions are all Terran icons? You guys are like rats You've already lost all credibility on TL. Let's dig up some of your posts shall we? Guy complains about WM in PvT forcing P to get early detection, then you ultimately try to play it off by "Stargate is viable.": + Show Spoiler + Cherry-picking stats as usual "based on the TvZ games I saw this month" + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/255254-designated-balance-discussion-thread?page=1122#22423 Adovocates Templar openings were abandoned because other builds were viable. Then gets called out for terrible argument + cherry-picking the data as usual. + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/461434-balance-test-map-soon-july-8th?page=23#454 Let's not forget your own changes to an already strong Terran: + Show Spoiler + http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460770-terran-buffs-balance-testing-soon-july-1?page=34#675 What a joke. You should not be able to post anything Starcraft-related. You always advocate for Terran, even when they during the times when they are broken, and then try to backup your data by cherry-picking. It's almost getting worse than Avilo's infamous T bias. While I agree that TheDwf has an incredible Terran bias, people listen to him more than you because his suggestions are not as extreme and he rationalizes them much better than you do. The post you linked to where he suggested some changes for example - I don't think there is merit to any of these changes, but he at least takes the time to show you his reasoning. Meanwhile, your changes seem like you thought of them right after losing a TvP on ladder and immediately posted them to TL without considering the impact they might have (requiring research to lift Terran buildings.. seriously?). Nobody is going to take you seriously until you calm down a little and try to talk in a way that is less hyperbolic. In the end we all have biases towards the race(s) we play but this forum is not a place to discuss biases. It's a place to propose ideas and talk about them using reasoned arguments that hold up despite our own personal biases. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
RotterdaM Event
Patches Events
PiGosaur Cup
OSC
SOOP
OSC
OSC
SOOP
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
