ya that too. there seems to be a trend to having bigger maps. i think the downside is that bigger maps are much harder for beginning players ... more area to scout ... but then again i'm no GM

Gladiator6

Sweden7024 Posts

December 15 2011 16:27 GMT

#503

Interesting, but I don't like that first map.

price

United States297 Posts

December 15 2011 16:28 GMT

#504

On December 16 2011 01:26 Cyro wrote:

Show nested quote +

the balance may be completely different for ladder too. if i remember, the recent matchup breakdown showed balance on the servers but in korea, TvZ was still 10-20% T favored

Ma7ix

Bulgaria4 Posts

December 15 2011 16:30 GMT

#505

I like the new maps. But I still think that Metalopolis and Xel'Naga are outdated. Shattered should be replaced in the next few patches too. Just that ladder map should be constantly replaced. We still have those maps for practice. Blizzard can replace Tal'Darim with some other GSL map too, there are alot of great maps on GSL map pool.

DarkPlasmaBall

United States44327 Posts

December 15 2011 16:30 GMT

#506

On December 15 2011 11:13 floatingbee wrote:
Removed 2 of my most dislike maps! Great! New maps seems really nice!

Same here :D

So happy that

"Removed:

- (4) Abyssal Caverns
- (4) Nerazim Crypt"

is going into effect ♥

Lorch

Germany3683 Posts

December 15 2011 16:32 GMT

#507

Glad they removed the maps they removed, 2 player map looks shitty, 4 player map might be decent. Still wish they'd just stop making maps and leave it to the people who know what they are doing (aka koreans). Sucks they didn't add daybreak and some other tournament maps, good to hear that they are looking into maps from the tl map contest though.
BUT why the fuck is xel naga caverns still in the pool? The map just sucks for almost all the matchups. Meta and Shattered should go soon as well.

Oh yeah and lol at them talking about 4 player maps having spawn positions that might favor one player over another and not having antiga be cross only...

ishboh

United States954 Posts

December 15 2011 16:38 GMT

#508

my only complaints:

entombed is going to be too easy to take a quick 3rd for toss and terran and turtle. there isn't really an easy way to muta harass and the only ways into any of the bases are two ramps that are basically right next to each other.

arid plateau has a gold expansion ><

Lupita

United States290 Posts

December 15 2011 16:41 GMT

#509

Can't believe they still haven't removed Xel'Naga. Arid Wastes looks heavily Toss/Terran favored, and I say this speaking as a toss player. The second map looks good though, looks fairly balances for good macro games.

conz

United Kingdom163 Posts

December 15 2011 16:42 GMT

#510

On Aria I'm not sure on the push distance from a P/T to the zergs most likely 3rd base, if the P/T takes the more open 3rd as if it gets up the 4th pretty much comes with it for free, I'm not a pro though so we'll see, I think it's like having no rocks on the side expansions on shaq and the base being closer and more easily defended.

Jedclark

United Kingdom903 Posts

December 15 2011 16:43 GMT

#511

On December 16 2011 01:30 Ma7ix wrote:
I like the new maps. But I still think that Metalopolis and Xel'Naga are outdated. Shattered should be replaced in the next few patches too. Just that ladder map should be constantly replaced. We still have those maps for practice. Blizzard can replace Tal'Darim with some other GSL map too, there are alot of great maps on GSL map pool.

Yeah, I don't like Shattered much, and Tal'Darim is okay.

blae000

Norway1640 Posts

December 15 2011 16:46 GMT

#512

Maps removed is great! wouldnt mind them taking out xelnaga caverns as well though!

2player maps looks bad O__O
4player one looks neat though.. :D

jnkw

Canada347 Posts

December 15 2011 16:47 GMT

#513

On December 16 2011 00:02 Louis8k8 wrote:

Show nested quote +

Okay, then it's just something wrong with the screenshot. It would be nice if OP could re-post that 4-player map screenshot.

I didn't take the screenshots myself -- they're straight from the Blizzard post. I'll double-check with the editor when I get home and update the OP if necessary.

Nymbul

United Kingdom127 Posts

December 15 2011 16:48 GMT

#514

The 4 player looks interesting. Very much like Antiga but with an easier to take 4th

It's good that Blizzard have realised that spawn positions on 4 player maps can provide 1 player with an unfair advantage. PvP on Antiga is pretty bad for that. But then again Blizzard should just follow the tournaments lead and force cross positions on that map anyway

I guess they haven't caught on to the GSL trend of removing golds but to be fair that base is far away, very wide open and requires you to break down rocks just to get at it. It's not like metalopolis where you can just float a CC there, drop down 10 mules and strip mine it dry in 2 mins

Serelitz

Netherlands2895 Posts

December 15 2011 16:49 GMT

#515

On December 16 2011 00:27 jdsowa wrote:
Hey, Protoss. Here's a little food for thought.

Z can try their optimal econ build--15 hatch--on you, but it's pretty risky due to the possibility of a cannon rush. So they can take that risk or they can go pool first and be safer.

There's nothing written in stone that says you are entitled to a 100% safe FFE on every map. The game should have risks. That's what makes it a game.

So I assume we can double FFE safely when you 15 hatch right? No, because as a Protoss you can't defend it without cannons and as a zerg a 15hatch is perfectly defendable.

ComusLoM

Norway3547 Posts

December 15 2011 16:50 GMT

#516

On December 15 2011 13:39 Plexa wrote:

Show nested quote +

Because destination was a great map, and this map looks like crap.

Took the words right out of my mouth. I miss Destination

, back in the day when only exceptional maps were played for over half a year instead of most maps.

diLLa

Netherlands247 Posts

December 15 2011 16:54 GMT

#517

The 4-player map has horrible cannon rush options, it's insane. Insant veto for me.

The 2-player map is somewhat okish, although it's probably pretty zerg favored.

Zelniq

United States7166 Posts

December 15 2011 16:54 GMT

#518

that 3rd on Entombed Valley looks nearly impossible to attack. place entire army at the location of the rocks and easily defend natural/3rd's ramps

in fact i can already picture tvz on horizontal positions on that map. terran takes 3rd quickly and easily, then later moves down from the 3rd's ramp to almost immediately arrive to zerg's equivalent "3rd ramp" (which most zergs would not take as a 3rd in this situation). terran siege pushes up this 3rd ramp, toward the location of zerg's rocks, sieges the zerg's main ramp + natural choke from a protected narrow choke position (both behind and in front)...all very quickly due to the short distance. Scary..

RyanRushia

United States2748 Posts

December 15 2011 16:55 GMT

#519

any chance is good change so far in my opinion, especially regarding maps

looking forward to them!

shadymmj

1906 Posts

December 15 2011 16:58 GMT

#520

On December 16 2011 01:38 ishboh wrote:
my only complaints:

entombed is going to be too easy to take a quick 3rd for toss and terran and turtle. there isn't really an easy way to muta harass and the only ways into any of the bases are two ramps that are basically right next to each other.

arid plateau has a gold expansion ><

that encourages a macro game and fast 3rd, right? you can't expect to be able to roach ling into contain every game...now protoss can have the same income as the zerg.