|
check out the season 6 lock thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=324352
http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/231231#c-208370844
Starting with Season 4, we began experimenting with prioritizing tournament-style maps on the StarCraft II ladder. Then in Season 6 we gave player-created maps the spotlight. Now, in Season 7, GSL tournament maps take the stage.
We ran a poll that allowed players from every region to vote on two GSL tournament maps to join the official ladder, as well as a poll to determine which map would be retired from the pool. The voting was close, but in the end three maps emerged victorious from the fray, while one will finally retire.
Season 7, which begins in the week of April 9, brings with it the following changes to the existing map pool -- though you can prepare for the new maps before the season starts by playing them as Custom Games:
Map being removed:
(4) The Shattered Temple
The poll results were clear: the time has come to retire The Shattered Temple from the official ladder.
(2) Daybreak LE
![[image loading]](http://us.media5.battle.net/cms/gallery/UBPXF82ROS8P1330144210373.jpg)
(4) Metropolis LE
![[image loading]](http://us.media3.battle.net/cms/gallery/TEM368DBG88N1330144233108.jpg)
(2) Ohana LE
![[image loading]](http://us.media3.battle.net/cms/gallery/RXSHXH745J2Y1332805234216.jpg)
Thank you all for helping us shape the Season 7 ladder by participating in these groundbreaking polls. We will continue to mix up the map lineup on the StarCraft II ladder to keep things fresh, and we’ll also maintain our focus on tournament-viable maps to ensure the fiercest competition. Maps that don’t make the cut will be replaced by maps that meet the standards set by major tournaments all around the globe.
See you on the ladder!
Self to note
S7 maps will look like this
Cloud Kingdom LE
Korhal compund LE
Antiga shipyard
Entombed Valley
Metalopolis
Shakuras Plateau
Tal Darim Altar
Daybreak LE
Metropolis LE
Ohana LE
no changes to team league/FFA maps 
|
Metropolis is a terrible map.
|
Thoughts about the replacement of the creep tumor at the islands with rocks and the replacement of the 6m1g with a standard 8m2g?
Edit: not visible on the post, but if you look at the maps on battle.net those changes are present.
|
Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches.![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MJcew.jpg)
|
the creep tumors on metropolis really bring the map down in my opinion
|
Daybreak is fine but don't like the other two. And it sucks tal darim isn't getting removed.
|
noooo, the middle base on daybreak was perfect ;_;
|
Man so many maps, though it isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I might actually utilize my 3 vetoes for the first time in a while though.
I've only played a few games on ohana, but it felt so awkward, and I'm surprised that they implemented it so quickly without all that much exposure.
Kind of sad to see Shattered go, thought it was a pretty outdated map, I had some pretty mapped out and specific matchup strategies on it, and not happy I can't use them anymore .
EDIT: Just thought about the addition of 2more minerals and 1 more gas at the fourth on daybreak, I think that might turn out to be a pretty large problem.
|
On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches.
What's this?
I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder?
|
Hm so my 3 veto's will be cloud kingdom, entombed valley but not sure on the third veto yet. May not need one but we'll see ^_^
|
Noooooooo, they changed Daybreak
Granted, it was kind of expected since it's Blizzard after all, but the change will definitely change the dynamics of the map. I wonder if tournaments will continue to use the old version of Daybreak with 6m1g in the middle.
Other than that, I'm excited about this map pool. No new team game maps or FFA maps is also disappointing. Perhaps Blizzard is focusing a bit too much on their competitive audience and not enough on their casual ones? I can't believe I just said that.
|
On March 29 2012 10:50 chaynesore wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches. What's this? I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder?
there were fewer patches in the original version, that was the point of the image.
|
On March 29 2012 10:50 chaynesore wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches. What's this? I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder?
there was 6 minerals and 1 gas, there is a slight typo in his post using 'only 8', implying there was more, not less prior.
|
Metropolis is just ugly. Reminds me of the map they put in a long time ago that looked almost exactly like it and was only slightly worse. They kept entombed? Wtf?
|
On March 29 2012 10:50 chaynesore wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches. What's this? I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder?
The image in the OP of daybreak has fewer patches there. But if you play the map it looks like that.
|
On March 29 2012 10:51 HelloSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:50 chaynesore wrote:On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches. What's this? I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder? there were fewer patches in the original version, that was the point of the image.
Cool, ty.. I was thrown by "edited to only 8 mineral patches" and thought he might have been talking about the image he posted was edited or something :S
|
On March 29 2012 10:50 chaynesore wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:46 coolcor wrote:Don't let the images fool you daybreak has been edited to only 8 mineral patches. What's this? I thought there were fewer mineral patches here? Either I'm stupid or your sentence is really unclear. Can someone confirm how many patches there are at these locations on the map coming to the ladder?
On the ladder version it is a standard base (aka 8 minerals 2 normal gas) on the GSL versions it's a 6 minerals, 1 rich gas, sort of a 3/4 base.
Does anyone have a picture confirming that islands on metropolis have rocks blocking them rather than a creep tumor?
|
I dislike how the preview image for Daybreak LE shows the old version with 6m1g in the middle instead of the actual LE map with 8m2g in the middle. It's very deceptive, especially since the Metropolis LE preview image is of the correct, adjusted LE version of the map with rocks on the islands instead of creep tumors.
|
This is great! I am very satisfied with those maps in the ladder, and might even play more now that the ladder is much better.
|
It's weird, because even on the loading shows the fourth having only 6mi1g >.>
|
Why would they use pictures of the GSL versions of the maps and then implement their shitty LE versions instead?
|
Man, compare this map pool to a year ago and the difference is night and day. It may not be perfect, but when the map with the most issues is Entombed Valley (or whatever your particular beef is) I think Blizzard has definitely improved significantly in this area.
|
On March 29 2012 10:56 eviltomahawk wrote:
I dislike how the preview image for Daybreak LE shows the old version with 6m1g in the middle instead of the actual LE map with 8m2g in the middle. It's very deceptive, especially since the Metropolis LE preview image is of the correct, adjusted LE version of the map with rocks on the islands instead of creep tumors.
Why Rocks on the islands.. they're going to be next to impossible to take :S I guess it evens things up a bit in that Zerg can't build the base immediately after the tumour is gone, but Zerg usually needs more and faster bases anyway so why would that be a problem? I don't think I like that.
|
What the fuck is metalpolis still doing in the map pool?
Other than that, I like the map pool a lot right now. Metropolis is probably the most interesting out of the new maps, and also probably really hard as terran but meh.
|
On March 29 2012 11:00 chaynesore wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:56 eviltomahawk wrote:
I dislike how the preview image for Daybreak LE shows the old version with 6m1g in the middle instead of the actual LE map with 8m2g in the middle. It's very deceptive, especially since the Metropolis LE preview image is of the correct, adjusted LE version of the map with rocks on the islands instead of creep tumors. Why Rocks on the islands.. they're going to be next to impossible to take :S I guess it evens things up a bit in that Zerg can't build the base immediately after the tumour is gone, but Zerg usually needs more and faster bases anyway so why would that be a problem? I don't think I like that.
It's an island though to be fair I don't think anyone is going to be taking it particularly quickly.
|
|
|
Shattered Temple kicked out before Metalopolis? I lol'd. Also, bleh looks like I'm only gonna have 2 vetoes thanks to Korhal Compound -__- shoulda gotten rid of that piece of crap imo lol.
|
at least they didn't turn the base into a gold one.
I don't get it, blizzard said they don't know how to make maps and therefore they just take community maps but then they have to change stuff. Why Blizzard? why?
|
On March 29 2012 11:01 Dingobloo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 11:00 chaynesore wrote:On March 29 2012 10:56 eviltomahawk wrote:
I dislike how the preview image for Daybreak LE shows the old version with 6m1g in the middle instead of the actual LE map with 8m2g in the middle. It's very deceptive, especially since the Metropolis LE preview image is of the correct, adjusted LE version of the map with rocks on the islands instead of creep tumors. Why Rocks on the islands.. they're going to be next to impossible to take :S I guess it evens things up a bit in that Zerg can't build the base immediately after the tumour is gone, but Zerg usually needs more and faster bases anyway so why would that be a problem? I don't think I like that. It's an island though to be fair I don't think anyone is going to be taking it particularly quickly.
No one ever takes those two expoes. At least in broadcasted matches so far. Only in like really long games, and even then, those expoes are extremely hard to defend. I think the map could do without them.
|
Damnit.
Why Metropolis? Why?!
Guess I know where 1 of my veto's are going.
|
Blizzard: listening to, and flipping the bird to the community since 1993
|
Metalopolis is still in there? Jesus x.x
That'll still get downvoted. Two more left to take out, if I want.
I'll have to play on the new maps first...
|
Ares[Effort]
DEMACIA6550 Posts
A big letdown
- Maps that have been played to death are still in the map pool
Why are maps such as Metalopolis, Shakuras, and Tal Darim still in the map pool? These maps have been around for over a year and, there are positional imbalances on all three where X race gains a advantage spawning in a certain location. A prime example is close air spawn on Metal in TvZ, where T has opportunities to do more damage with his regular openers due to the short distance.
Maps have been changed so they don't confuse the casual players. This removes any sort of variation which also has an effect on balance. All maps are forced to have 8m2g at every single base and they replace any different type of expansion blockers with rocks. Metropolis had creep tumors blocking the island expo's now they have replaced that with rocks. This allows for Terrans to simply lift their CC and float and instantly start mining, no longer a need to bring an scv and wait for the creep to recede.
|
On March 29 2012 11:05 idonthinksobro wrote:
at least they didn't turn the base into a gold one.
I don't get it, blizzard said they don't know how to make maps and therefore they just take community maps but then they have to change stuff. Why Blizzard? why?
Blizzard has a policy of changing maps to suit casual and new gamers. Having creep tumors, unconventional bases and random neutral supply depots will sort of confuse casual gamers I guess.
But it's just a bad move IMO. It's not really that difficult to put a disclaimer in the map description or have players figure it out on their own.
EDIT: But then again, given that they didn't even bother changing the two preview shots of Daybreak and Metropolis to reflect the changes they did....
|
We are all so fortunate that Blizzard is such an amazing company that updates their map pool with competitive maps! My votes for DAYBREAK! =D
|
1st time in a long time i don't think i'll be vetoing any maps...
|
RIP shattered temple you were one of my favorites TT
|
I really hate Ohana, Korhal, Metalopolis, and Metropolis ._. Why can't we have sick maps yooooo
|
On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid
Explain?
|
On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid
I'm glad I didn't have to say it.
|
Can someone explain to me what does LE stands for?
|
On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid
Seconded.
Metalopolis, Taldarim, Cloud Kingdom and Metropolis have no place in the map pool. Daybreak is a welcome addition though, that map makes up for the rest of the ladder's failings in my opinion.
|
On March 29 2012 11:14 -Strider- wrote:
Can someone explain to me what does LE stands for?
Ladder Edition
|
On March 29 2012 11:11 Son of Gnome wrote:Explain?
Changed the maps for to please the casuals (6 min 1 rich gas to 8 min 2 gas on Daybreak, destructable rocks instead of creep tumor on island expo)
|
helllllllllll yea i love all those maps :D
|
On March 29 2012 10:51 Misanthrope wrote:
Metropolis is just ugly. Reminds me of the map they put in a long time ago that looked almost exactly like it and was only slightly worse. They kept entombed? Wtf?
thats sad entombed vally is the worst map i have ever played even worser then backwater gulch.
|
The maps the community goes through painstakingly to balance, edit, tweak and find cleaver solutions to complicated problems over the course of several months from various creators to get the most balanced and fun maps for competitive play. Only to get their work shat on by Blizzard in less than a week.
Good god Blizzard, revert your crappy changes, they aren't helping anybody.
|
Blizzard shouldnt cater for the casual gamer. Why should those who take Blizzards game seriously, have to adjust for those who play the game at lower levels (and more than likely play the game A LOT less). If anything, those in lower leagues, should have to adjust to those in the higher levels. Balance maps from the top down, not from the bottom up.
|
woo I don't have to play korhal compound anymore!
my shattered Veto is going to that map^^
while my other two are still on metal and tal'darim
|
Metropolis will be very fun map as terran.
|
On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid
Since I would get warned/banned for making a comment like that, you could at least give us an explanation. They aren't doing everything right, but I don't see any horrifying news in my opinion.
|
Excited for Daybreak... not sure about the other two maps, look like Terran nightmares.
|
Wow, metro and daybreak were balanced in part of those cool things (6m1hyg and creep tumor). I just feel blizz is just picking and choosing maps and making them ladder friendly, even if it imbalances them.
|
Does Metropolis have any spawn restrictions, such as no 'close by ground' ?
|
Will be so much easier for Terran on Metropolis to take the island expos which now only have rocks blocking them.
Wonder if the map(s) still have some tiles read "GSL"... 
|
A lot of complaints going around in this thread. Indeed, the map pool could be better. However, it could also be a lot worse, and in fact it has been much worse in the past.
The days of Slag Pits, Steppes of War, and Kulas Ravine still seem like only yesterday for me. I, for one, welcome these ladder maps even though I dislike their changes.
|
On March 29 2012 11:28 Kaitlin wrote:
Does Metropolis have any spawn restrictions, such as no 'close by ground' ?
Only close air and cross, yeah. Just like Metalopolis and Shakuras.
|
This is the best map pool we've had by far. You just can't please anyone sometimes.
|
On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid
Hate train picking up passengers!
I think it's good blizz is finally making the ladder pool moreso like a tournament one, I'm just not liking these weird little changes like the 6m>8m stuff.
|
ewww metalopolis is in the ladder pool
oh well....i know where one of my vetoes will be toward
|
Yay!! Such a good pool. I will now be able to veto Shakuras, Metalopolis and Tal'Darim. Before I left Tal'Darim in so I could veto Shattered.
Kinda disappointed they modified Daybreak though. They shouldn't have changed the middle bases.
Edit: Wow everyone is whining too much when for the most part this is a good thing. Just be glad we don't have Slag Pits, Backwater Gulch, Steppes, and all those other maps now. Sure they changed a few of the bases on the maps and that kinda sucks, but for 99% of players that won't make a difference anyway. And if all else fails you can veto any of the maps and still have a fairly good setup. It's not like in season 1 where vetos had to go towards downright broken maps so you could have games lasting longer than 10 minutes. Just think of Blistering Sands with back rocks that made all-ins superior to standard play, Steppes where 6pools and 12 drone rushes were standard strategies because they actually worked consistently, Jungle Basin, where a third was a rarity at best, old Shakuras, where certain races had to play under the assumption they were going to lose their main at some point if they reached the late game so (for zerg) tech had to be made elsewhere, every map with close positions, which was almost all 4-player maps.
|
Overall the map pool has improved, but it could be even better if Blizzard quit with the strange alterations.
All in all I'm still happy though
|
I dont understand why they have to abide by the same formula for there maps.. has to be rocks and always has to be 8m 2 g...
|
How can Blizzard get everything so wrong all the time... Goddamn they are stubborn about their stupid policies.
|
Why does Blizzard feel the need to bastardize perfectly fine maps? Wonder how Daybreak will play out on ladder TT_TT
EDIT: With how BNET 2.0 is going and map pools, we really need custom ladders like in BW (WGTour, PGTour, iCCup).. its just ridiculous :[
|
I am really irritated with what they did to Daybreak. This changes the whole maps dynamic..we need a petition or something.
|
Really sad that blizzard isn't using my update for Korhal Compound It made the third+fifth easier to hold and opened up the map.
|
.......
why rocks on a island? makes no sense. atleast with creep tumor u could kill it with just a scv/probe, but rocks? that voids all and any point of even taking that island because u will have to take a good chunk of ur army in dropship/prism/ovie/nydus to kill it...
|
Can't they just delete metalopolis, or even delete the gold minerals? Useless map to play, because its modified in every tournaemnt...
|
What is their problem? Why is it so hard for them just to get the map and put it in the map pool?
|
They just have to insist with their stubborn changes don't they? Guess we know the next thing to complain about to Blizzard
Would probably veto Entombed, Taldarim and Metalopolis
|
I don't understand why they are adding in Metropolis... Terran will have to fight tooth and nail for that third..
|
No, Shattered Temple is done, then no one gonna plays with Starter Edition user anymore! Why Blizzard ! T_T
|
|
|
Seeing blizzard tampering with tournament maps they add to the ladder makes me a sad panda. Sometimes I wonder who the fuck is in charge and what their reasoning is for doing so.
|
taldarim, entombed and metrolpolis is stupid. get rid of it. and why are you fucking up daybreak. DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T HAVE A FULL BASE THERE BLIZ
|
now just need to remove the gold base on antiga ...
|
On March 29 2012 11:27 Mr Showtime wrote:Since I would get warned/banned for making a comment like that, you could at least give us an explanation. They aren't doing everything right, but I don't see any horrifying news in my opinion.
Blizzard editied the GSL maps to reflect their bland oatmeal style by adding rocks, mineral patches and geysers to expansions.
|
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_<
|
Lookin' much better this season!
Except the golds on metal and antiga have got to go. And forced cross spawns on antiga would be nice as well :/
|
Metalopolis and Metropolis seem kinda redundant no?
I'll only be vetoing Meta.
I hate play PvP on Tal'Darim but I mostly get Z/T since most Protosses veto it, which works out perfectly for me since I like that map except for 4 gates.
|
Why Blizzard Why???
You were so close...
God dammit...
|
On March 29 2012 13:50 Erik.TheRed wrote:
Lookin' much better this season!
Except the golds on metal and antiga have got to go. And forced cross spawns on antiga would be nice as well :/
On that note, same thing with entombed, non cross is absolutely horrid.
|
We should complain on bnet forums, they listened to us about map pool hopefully they will listen again and stop fucking with the maps before implementing them.
|
Yay, map pool looks so fresh and hip! Blizz really liked Ohana though, eh?
Also, I totally disagree with changing Daybreak, that is NOT the map that we voted on. The map is too different T_T
|
On March 29 2012 13:57 DanLee wrote:
We should complain on bnet forums, they listened to us about map pool hopefully they will listen again and stop fucking with the maps before implementing them.
You must have not been around the Battle.net forums for any of the previous map introductions.
Blizzard ignores everything when it comes to balancing maps.
|
On March 29 2012 14:02 Tropical Bob wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 13:57 DanLee wrote:
We should complain on bnet forums, they listened to us about map pool hopefully they will listen again and stop fucking with the maps before implementing them. You must have not been around the Battle.net forums for any of the previous map introductions. Blizzard ignores everything when it comes to balancing maps.
I wouldn't call what they do "balancing" maps. Its more like they decided well since it plays out well in major tournaments lets fuck it up and make it a crappy imbalanced map instead. They need to quit fucking with the maps and implement them as all major tournaments do.
|
On March 29 2012 13:46 mrtomjones wrote:
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_<
SC2 is a 1v1 game so it makes sense that they don't focus on team or ffa maps.
|
My remaining veto goes to.... metropolis!
|
On March 29 2012 11:44 bokchoi wrote:
Why does Blizzard feel the need to bastardize perfectly fine maps? Wonder how Daybreak will play out on ladder TT_TT
EDIT: With how BNET 2.0 is going and map pools, we really need custom ladders like in BW (WGTour, PGTour, iCCup).. its just ridiculous :[
Pretty much very little reason to not take the middle as your 4th, it offers so much more map control than the outside bases
|
I can't believe Metalopolis and Shakuras are still there. Heck, the revamped Desert Oasis would be better or at least a change. It's also sad that Blizzard lets their pride prevent them from allowing proper resource adjustments, because they know anything else shows they balanced the game around a very narrow context.
|
I guess we get to see how much that base will affect Daybreak...It seems like it is going to favor Terran taking it as a faster 3rd with PF. It gives such a huge advantage due to it's central location that it is probably going to feel similar to XNC. Albeit the middle base is a blue base, the position is so key that a 3rd in the middle is way better than the typical 3rd base (less ground to cover from to middle to the main and you can defend the natural extremely easy once the PF is in place. I don't know how much it will affect ZvP but it could have the same effect and help Protoss defend 3 bases like Cloud Kingdom. Park the core of your army at the bottom of the big ramp and leave your blink stalkers in a central location where they can blink to cover everything easily in your first 3 bases.
We'll see but I definitely see the ability to Terran to exploit the equal economy from the middle now.
|
You guys whine so much... we have so many good maps now! Don't be hatin...
|
Amazing what 3m1g can do to an entire community...
still guys, the best map pool by far! Blizzard is still on the right track methinks.
|
god pvz is going to be a nightmare on these new maps... mutas. and daybreak go away, so fricken split map 3 choke late game blar.
|
Dammit Blizzard, why the hell did you have to add the extra minerals? Such a stupid decision.
|
maps work PERFECTLY WELL with PERFECT BALANCE in MAJOR TOURNAMENTS.. yet they still fucking edit the maps
shame!
|
On March 29 2012 14:08 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 13:46 mrtomjones wrote:
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_< SC2 is a 1v1 game so it makes sense that they don't focus on team or ffa maps.
meh . they should at least change the team maps . (ffa is as good as dead to me  ) . I play 1v1 very often but when I want to chill with my school mates on starcraft , i turn to team games . maps getting kinda mundane and stale tbh.
|
They edited daybreaks 4th???... wow blizzard just really dont get it do they... =/
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Sigh. Changes to daybreak as expected
|
On March 29 2012 15:03 Plexa wrote:Sigh. Changes to daybreak as expected
so sad. so sad indeed.
|
I like how all the overview shots for Daybreak LE including the in game one is the wrong version.
Classy.
|
On March 29 2012 14:08 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 13:46 mrtomjones wrote:
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_< SC2 is a 1v1 game so it makes sense that they don't focus on team or ffa maps.
That's funny... I just logged into SC2 and it gave me the option of playing 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4 games too... odd eh? I guess I must have gotten the version that involves more fun and you got the version where you only play the same thing repeatedly and try to convince people that playing with friends is dumb or non-existent.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
Why you mess with Daybreak Blizz? Sigh...........
|
I'm excited to play on daybreak caused I've seen it played in tournaments so much. Metropolis appears pretty standard, I like the looks of it aesthetically I guess. Ohana looks pretty neat too, though I've never played on it nor seen it played on.
Kinda bummed they changed the resources on daybreak, but then again I don't think it will affect my gameplay much at all.
It's sad to see shattered temple go, that map has been around since the dawn of time, in one form or another. I've had a lot of good games on it, and I've gone through my whole career playing it. Maybe they'll bring shattered back someday for kicks.
|
of course blizzard has to screw with daybreak and couldnt just leave it only..... and how the hell is metal still in the map pool sick of wasting a veto on map that has such a strong pvz imbal
|
On March 29 2012 15:16 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 14:08 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:On March 29 2012 13:46 mrtomjones wrote:
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_< SC2 is a 1v1 game so it makes sense that they don't focus on team or ffa maps. That's funny... I just logged into SC2 and it gave me the option of playing 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4 games too... odd eh? I guess I must have gotten the version that involves more fun and you got the version where you only play the same thing repeatedly and try to convince people that playing with friends is dumb or non-existent.
That's funny he never said they weren't in the game. He just said the focus was on 1v1, which is true.
|
On the LE daybreak, doesn't that make Terran planting down a Planetary on the outside base and using it as a staging ground a la the gold on Xelnaga Caverns a little strong? It was already the default 4th and sometimes even third for Terrans on the GSL version because of the position, and now there's more money there as well.
|
On March 29 2012 15:21 bokchoi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 15:16 mrtomjones wrote:On March 29 2012 14:08 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:On March 29 2012 13:46 mrtomjones wrote:
WTF Why do they keep ignoring team and ffa maps >_< SC2 is a 1v1 game so it makes sense that they don't focus on team or ffa maps. That's funny... I just logged into SC2 and it gave me the option of playing 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4 games too... odd eh? I guess I must have gotten the version that involves more fun and you got the version where you only play the same thing repeatedly and try to convince people that playing with friends is dumb or non-existent. That's funny he never said they weren't in the game. He just said the focus was on 1v1, which is true.
No he said that it IS a 1v1 game which it isn't It is a game with multiple options. The pro scene is 1v1.
|
They fucked up Daybreak with that mineral change, and we still have that shit Metalopolis. At least temple is out.
Way better then the old map pool, but still a long way to go.
Edit: Honestly, how is it possible to fail at this? I voted for Daybreak, not fucking BlizzardDaybreak.
-_-
|
These maps look incredible, this could be the best map pool we've ever had on ladder. So excited.
|
I don't understand why Daybreak is a good map. In MLG, it seemed like every protoss died trying to take a 3rd on that map. The terrain makes the 3rd impossible to defend if you're not zerg, and the 6minerals => 8 thing seems completely inconsequential.
|
Yeah I don't understand either how they can make us vote for maps and then change them into some pitty "LADDER EDITION" version of the map.
A) Don't touch anything on the GSL maps we want. We want them for a reason, and they are good maps for a reason. You guys at Blizzard doesn't make the map any better when you change things you think are better and then put the map as Blizzard LE.
B) Don't fucking change them maps after a vote. We voted for GSL Daybreak, not Daybreak LE. If you are gonna use Daybreak LE with such a major change, then put that map up on the vote and not the original Daybreak.
wtf
|
On March 29 2012 11:14 -Strider- wrote:
Can someone explain to me what does LE stands for?
LE is Ladder edition.
|
Removing the worst map and adding what will now become the three best maps => Season 7 looking really good
|
Daybreak become hugely Terran favored with a full expo in the middle.
But people should stop hate on Blizzard ( the one who said Blizzard is stupid is himself pretty dumb ). We get that Blizzard should not change the maps that much, but it's still hella better to have a modified version of Daybreak than having Jungle Bassin.
|
Did they change anything besides the fourth on Daybreak and the rocks on Metropolis?
|
Guys, there's 3000 more minerals and 2500 more gas in the middle now. I don't see how that is a *huge* change since it's the typical 4th base. Besides, when was Terran lacking gas if not playing mech?
|
almost only good maps now, its really really awesome!! :D
|
|
|
Hmmm, not too terrible. I am a little sad though hat they took out shattered temple. Would have prefered to see Metalopolis go :/
Would also be nice to have maybe 4 vetos. I want to keep my three from this season (meta, korhal and entombed) and maybe add metropolis.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
I can't understand, whats bad with creep tumors at those islands?
Every faction will need some gas, time and resources to kill it. You think, zergs can destroy it easier and faster? Yes, but they need to transport Drone, using nydus for 300 minerals and 300 gas, or use Overlord drop, that costs same (100/100 speed and 200/200 for transport upgrade).
Terrans will need to wait, when creep disapears, but they can more easily destroy it, using tank splash damage, or 270-minerals scanner, or raven.
Protosses have air, cheap observer, they only need creep dissapear time.
|
Im glad that daybreak will be added. Just a bit sad that shattered was removed instead of metalopolis
|
Dustin Broweder said a year or more ago in a interview, that they don't want to confuse newer players with different minieralpatch and geyser counts. So this was totally expected.
And newer people already know gold bases from the campaign, that is why they are staying.
|
On March 29 2012 11:46 monitor wrote:Really sad that blizzard isn't using my update for Korhal Compound It made the third+fifth easier to hold and opened up the map.
I checked the Korhal Compound thread and there is no update there. May we have a look at the new version?
|
On March 29 2012 10:46 Jubio wrote:
the creep tumors on metropolis really bring the map down in my opinion
LOL bet you're terran
|
On March 29 2012 14:05 Ghost.573 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 14:02 Tropical Bob wrote:On March 29 2012 13:57 DanLee wrote:
We should complain on bnet forums, they listened to us about map pool hopefully they will listen again and stop fucking with the maps before implementing them. You must have not been around the Battle.net forums for any of the previous map introductions. Blizzard ignores everything when it comes to balancing maps. I wouldn't call what they do "balancing" maps. Its more like they decided well since it plays out well in major tournaments lets fuck it up and make it a crappy imbalanced map instead. They need to quit fucking with the maps and implement them as all major tournaments do.
That's the point. They do the exact opposite of balance maps. Every time they've introduced shitty maps into the PTR, there's a huge community backlash on the Battle.net forums about how fucking terrible basically everything about them are. At the very least, important things like the main-to-third siege issue on Antiga.
But everything goes ignored. Every time. Even when some sort of reasoning seems to have seeped into Blizzard's decision-making (e.g. They're putting community maps into the pool!), they just take another step backward.
|
On March 29 2012 16:48 Existor wrote:
I can't understand, whats bad with creep tumors at those islands?
Every faction will need some gas, time and resources to kill it. You think, zergs can destroy it easier and faster? Yes, but they need to transport Drone, using nydus for 300 minerals and 300 gas, or use Overlord drop, that costs same (100/100 speed and 200/200 for transport upgrade).
Terrans will need to wait, when creep disapears, but they can more easily destroy it, using tank splash damage, or 270-minerals scanner, or raven.
Protosses have air, cheap observer, they only need creep dissapear time.
The problem is how different it reacts to races. Terrans and Zerg really doesn't care they can still take it in the same time. Protoss on the other hand is screwed.
Here is what i wrote about the creep islands a while back (wall of text you have been warned)
:
+ Show Spoiler +Gotta admit i am not liking the Neutral creep turmor island expantions. Island expantions by default always favor terran. This is not only because of lift off but also because of turrets which are superior to their counterparts because of possible Upgrades and repairs. When even Blizzard say they can't make islands balanced you really have to consider if it can work.
The problem i find with a creep tumor is also that it reacts so differently to different races.
Protoss:
Protoss are already a clear losser in terms of Island expantions because their only option for taking them is through a warp prism. Now they also have to get a Observer to make space and even then they have to wait for the creep to reside. Protoss don't really have other options for removing the tumor as stargate doesn't provide mobile detection. You could drop a cannon on island but then it is just going to take even longer to take the expansion.
Zerg:
Zerg is slightly better in this regard as they do have 2 options for getting a drone to the island. Nydus and Overlord drops. The latter is probably preferred as it doesn't give it self away instantly. Both of these require lair so the detection is not really an issue. Also once the tumor has been dealt with Zergs can instantly take the expansion as Creep doesn't prevent zerg buildings.
Terran:
As mentioned Terran already has many advantages regarding islands which is why even blizzard has given up on them. Besides Turrets and Lift off terran also have scan which gives acces to much earlier removal of the tumor, potentially through a Banshee rush. A raven could also do the job. While the creep still has to reside terrans can have their base ready and even make it an orbital before that. Once the creep goes away terrans can instantly land the finished base which overall might be even faster than what Zergs can currently do. Drops are also a much more common tactic for terran and medivacs has multible usages besides taking the expantion. Hence terran still has a clear advantage regarding these islands, with or without tumor.
TLDR: Toss is royally boned in regard to the expansion, Zerg and Terran don't really care.
|
|
|
On March 29 2012 11:19 jax1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 10:51 Misanthrope wrote:
Metropolis is just ugly. Reminds me of the map they put in a long time ago that looked almost exactly like it and was only slightly worse. They kept entombed? Wtf? thats sad entombed vally is the worst map i have ever played even worser then backwater gulch.
great troll man, just great, entombed is a solid albeit slightly protoss favoured map, slag pits and backwater gulch were unplayable pieces of garbage
|
finally for the love of god a decent map pool!
|
On March 29 2012 13:53 KhAmun wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 13:50 Erik.TheRed wrote:
Lookin' much better this season!
Except the golds on metal and antiga have got to go. And forced cross spawns on antiga would be nice as well :/ On that note, same thing with entombed, non cross is absolutely horrid.
the one with the non rock fourth is somewhat awkward, the one with the rocked 4th is a solid balanced area as you can both expand sideways a la shak, i'd be fine with a shak style setup, although i don't mind the other style either
|
Cool changes, looking forward to it. Will miss how easy it was to split the map on Shattered, but I guess it had to go!
|
Too bad none of these maps even slightly favor Terran in TvP :x
|
Fuck you Blizzard for taking votes and listening to what maps people want in and what they want removed!!!!!
Seriously people, what is the matter with you? For once Blizzard did something right and actually asked the opinion of the people who play this game.
|
1v1 is looking better, but 2v2 map pool is horrible...
2v2 map pool is so old.. and unbalanced that it is not fun to play anymore.. (You have to play them in ESL and so on..)
|
Once again you can never appease TL....
|
while everyone else is complaining, i'd like to point out that this is the best map pool we have ever had so far.
|
On March 29 2012 15:03 Plexa wrote:Sigh. Changes to daybreak as expected
They WERE expected I don't know why everyone is getting upset about it.
Daybreak LE is still going to be a much better ladder map than anything that's been in previous seasons, this Blizz hate is totally uncalled for. They're doing exactly what the community has been asking them to do, but they have their own rules for how maps are supposed to work on the ladder.
Either way we're getting what we wanted a lot more so than we were before.
|
I don't see why everyone is all upset over Daybreak.
1. You knew it was going to happen. Blizzard has already made it clear they want all bases to have the same amount of resources.
2. While it makes the map different, it doesn't necessarily make it worse. If anything, it may be more balanced this way. It's not like the GSL version was perfectly balanced. According to TLPD, Zerg had a 57+% win rate in both matchups on the GSL version of the map.
|
On March 29 2012 17:21 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 16:48 Existor wrote:
I can't understand, whats bad with creep tumors at those islands?
Every faction will need some gas, time and resources to kill it. You think, zergs can destroy it easier and faster? Yes, but they need to transport Drone, using nydus for 300 minerals and 300 gas, or use Overlord drop, that costs same (100/100 speed and 200/200 for transport upgrade).
Terrans will need to wait, when creep disapears, but they can more easily destroy it, using tank splash damage, or 270-minerals scanner, or raven.
Protosses have air, cheap observer, they only need creep dissapear time. The problem is how different it reacts to races. Terrans and Zerg really doesn't care they can still take it in the same time. Protoss on the other hand is screwed. Here is what i wrote about the creep islands a while back (wall of text you have been warned) : + Show Spoiler +Gotta admit i am not liking the Neutral creep turmor island expantions. Island expantions by default always favor terran. This is not only because of lift off but also because of turrets which are superior to their counterparts because of possible Upgrades and repairs. When even Blizzard say they can't make islands balanced you really have to consider if it can work.
The problem i find with a creep tumor is also that it reacts so differently to different races.
Protoss:
Protoss are already a clear losser in terms of Island expantions because their only option for taking them is through a warp prism. Now they also have to get a Observer to make space and even then they have to wait for the creep to reside. Protoss don't really have other options for removing the tumor as stargate doesn't provide mobile detection. You could drop a cannon on island but then it is just going to take even longer to take the expansion.
Zerg:
Zerg is slightly better in this regard as they do have 2 options for getting a drone to the island. Nydus and Overlord drops. The latter is probably preferred as it doesn't give it self away instantly. Both of these require lair so the detection is not really an issue. Also once the tumor has been dealt with Zergs can instantly take the expansion as Creep doesn't prevent zerg buildings.
Terran:
As mentioned Terran already has many advantages regarding islands which is why even blizzard has given up on them. Besides Turrets and Lift off terran also have scan which gives acces to much earlier removal of the tumor, potentially through a Banshee rush. A raven could also do the job. While the creep still has to reside terrans can have their base ready and even make it an orbital before that. Once the creep goes away terrans can instantly land the finished base which overall might be even faster than what Zergs can currently do. Drops are also a much more common tactic for terran and medivacs has multible usages besides taking the expantion. Hence terran still has a clear advantage regarding these islands, with or without tumor. TLDR: Toss is royally boned in regard to the expansion, Zerg and Terran don't really care.
This post doesn't make sense.
Protoss are building observers anyways and Warp Prisms cost only minerals while still having utility later.
Zerg would need an overseer for detection, too, and drop tech and nydus cost a lot of gas and don't provide much use later. However, Zerg have the advantage that they don't need to wait for creep to recede (i still predict no Zerg will ever take any of those bases).
However, i think terrans do have an advantage but they don't need to do a banshee or raven rush.
On one hand they could just load SCVs into a command center (not OC), fly it over without landing, unload the 5 SCVs, scan, kill tumor with SCVs, wait,land and then mine.
However, this is quite a big investment in minerals and mining time (5 SCVs,CC floating for 2-3 minutes) early on and the opponent might just attack and kill you in that time, simply making a short stop on that island with a marine/marauder drop that is on the way to the opponent anyways is far more cost efficient and even works with destructible rocks.
TLDR: All races care.
Anyways, i'm happy they added those maps, but the change on Daybreak is really bad, makes the map almost like Jungle Basin where a PF in the middle shifts the whole game around.
|
I HATE the team league maps (2v2, 3v3. 4v4), wish they would get rid of most of them and make some decent ones.
|
On March 29 2012 18:00 lefix wrote:
while everyone else is complaining, i'd like to point out that this is the best map pool we have ever had so far.
So right, this is awesome, very well played Blizzard! I think daybreak is a bit too protoss-friendly in pvt, but thats a tiny tiny issue compared to most of the other maps we've had, this mappool is motherfrickin fantastic!
|
I was looking at Daybreak overview in the op and i was "yyyyyyyyyyyyyeaaaaahhhh the smalll base survived!!!!!" and then i saw the post showing it's not...
F M L
KIL ME NOW PLS
|
On March 29 2012 16:50 zocktol wrote:
Dustin Broweder said a year or more ago in a interview, that they don't want to confuse newer players with different minieralpatch and geyser counts. So this was totally expected.
And newer people already know gold bases from the campaign, that is why they are staying.
The campaign had a whole bunch of different layouts for resources for bases and nobody ever complained about the base with 3 gas or anything. There is nothing about the campaign that suggests blizzard thinks players can only handle one standard resource arrangement it is only in multilayer they think that for some reason.
Can you or anyone explain why a newer player will be confused so much that a base with less resources gives less resources so much it will completely ruin their fun in a ladder game against their equally skilled opponent.
How many new players are there 2 years after release anyways should blizzard really be afraid to introduce tiny new things on the maps after this long?
|
This aggression against 2v2s will not stand, man!
|
On March 29 2012 10:49 KhAmun wrote:
I've only played a few games on ohana, but it felt so awkward, and I'm surprised that they implemented it so quickly without all that much exposure.
Its been played a bunch on the KR weeklies and other smaller tournaments, and is in fact being played in the code S as a write this.
|
gotta give some credit to nasl as well, who first introduced ohana and made it known 
|
Im so angry with Blizzard. They destroyed Daybreak and put rocks in metropolis.
Seriously, Blizzard...
|
As if the 8 minerals patches on daybreak would change anything.
get real
|
On March 29 2012 18:21 haitike wrote:
Im so angry with Blizzard. They destroyed Daybreak and put rocks in metropolis.
Seriously, Blizzard...
Quick! To the barn! We must get our pitchforks!
|
I am sad that Shattered was removed. I my opinion, Meta should have gone, especially when we get Metropolis as new addition.
|
On March 29 2012 18:22 yoigen wrote:
As if the 8 minerals patches on daybreak would change anything.
get real
That forward position will be too good.
get real
|
On March 29 2012 18:22 yoigen wrote:
As if the 8 minerals patches on daybreak would change anything.
get real
They extra minerals and gas change the map dynamic completely. Before, it was a decision between:
i take that base and gain map control but have lower gas income, which means slower tech
vs
i take the other base, have higher income and therefor faster tech but i won't gain the map control.
Now it's "yay, good income + map control"
It will mostly play a role in XvT matchups since terrans can place a PF with some tanks there, but it's still a huge change.
|
United States97276 Posts
|
Even though a rarely play I like the new maps. I love the fact they are trying things like island expansions again, removing everything that favors a specific race before rigorously trying to balance it is going to ruin the game IMO. More map features means a more dynamic game. The maps are one of the reasons I lost motivation for playing ladder, to me there is not much differentiating the maps except size and whether your nat has a ramp or not. I want map features that drastically influence strategy and decision making, even at slightly lower levels.
|
Entombed Valley and Metropolis are pretty imba maps. I hope they replace them with good ones.
|
I can understand some are not totally happy with the changes made to Daybreak but seriously...
8m2g Daybreak is still a better training at Daybreak than Shattered Temple for example.
|
Vatican City State334 Posts
I'll be amazed if Protoss ever wins a standard game on Metropolis. Zerg can go muta and make untouchable hatches on both islands, Terran has a free 1/1/1 + expansion build into mass air as they can just kill the tumor with their first banshee while harassing. Stupid map.
|
On March 29 2012 18:55 AnalThermometer wrote:
I'll be amazed if Protoss ever wins a standard game on Metropolis. Zerg can go muta and make untouchable hatches on both islands, Terran has a free 1/1/1 + expansion build into mass air as they can just kill the tumor with their first banshee while harassing. Stupid map.
And protoss can just go phoenix (like HerO does vs 1/1/1) and kill mutalisks and banshees and take the expos with their cheap Warp Prisms and the observers they have anyways...
I'm not a fan of island expos myself but there are some really one-sided arguments against them in this thread. I think i haven't seen a single game in GSL where any player took an island expo. If they were that imbalanced, don't you think the top tier players would take advantage of that?
|
On March 29 2012 18:55 AnalThermometer wrote:
I'll be amazed if Protoss ever wins a standard game on Metropolis. Zerg can go muta and make untouchable hatches on both islands, Terran has a free 1/1/1 + expansion build into mass air as they can just kill the tumor with their first banshee while harassing. Stupid map.
Zergs REALLY don't want island expansions, you need nydus or constant drops to get your units away from there since hatcheries are our unit-producing structures, and you have to spend a lot more APM to make sure flying units/drones are built from the island expos while lings etc are built from the non-island ones.
|
The new maps are nice, but please start making new maps for the 2v2 etc. Mappool!!!
|
Daybreak Planetary Edition T_T
I shouldn't really whine after comparing the map pool from a couple of seasons ago
|
FUCK ME DEAD. NEED 3 more VETO PLS BLIZ
antiga entombed daybreak ohana taldarim metropolis
|
The best thing about these stupid changes to the maps will be the rant by iNcontrol on the next State of the Game
|
Wow people are so whiny . I like the new maps, Lets atleast try to play on them b4 we prepare the pitchforks?
|
Will the neutral supply depot there on the new maps?
|
Daybreak is awesome. Don't like metropolis. Haven't tried ohana o.o
|
On March 29 2012 18:06 Superouman wrote:
I was looking at Daybreak overview in the op and i was "yyyyyyyyyyyyyeaaaaahhhh the smalll base survived!!!!!" and then i saw the post showing it's not...
F M L
KIL ME NOW PLS
MAP MAKERS UNITE FOR RITUALISTIC SUICIDE!
I can't believe they ruined Daybreak
|
Map pool in SC2 could be better in ladder and tournament level, the maps are mostly not so amazing. I think the number of Terran players will sink to an all time low this season, maps are looking less and less friendly for Terran players in ladder map pool.
|
I'm happy metalopolis is still there - we need some classics. It was more so in BW and WC3, right? Some maps just stuck for longer?
|
why blizzard isnt learning ? still no one play this map everone train on the 6mineral map for everything cause its used in all tours ... it was even importent its a smaller base so i have NO idea why they changed it to a worse map ... best map ever made ? we HAVE to change that they thought and bam ...
i feel so frustrated about blizzard
On March 29 2012 20:27 Zythius wrote:
I'm happy metalopolis is still there - we need some classics. It was more so in BW and WC3, right? Some maps just stuck for longer?
bw really no had a ladder made by blizzard that was used (they needed 11 years for change it to faster speed) but in the big leagues (most on illegal servers) as well as in the proleagues the maps changed VERY often
|
personally I hate cloud kingdom and I hate metropolis.
Daybreak is a good addition.
Ohana looks like that other map from last season or something.
|
On March 29 2012 18:11 coolcor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 16:50 zocktol wrote:
Dustin Broweder said a year or more ago in a interview, that they don't want to confuse newer players with different minieralpatch and geyser counts. So this was totally expected.
And newer people already know gold bases from the campaign, that is why they are staying. The campaign had a whole bunch of different layouts for resources for bases and nobody ever complained about the base with 3 gas or anything. There is nothing about the campaign that suggests blizzard thinks players can only handle one standard resource arrangement it is only in multilayer they think that for some reason. Can you or anyone explain why a newer player will be confused so much that a base with less resources gives less resources so much it will completely ruin their fun in a ladder game against their equally skilled opponent. How many new players are there 2 years after release anyways should blizzard really be afraid to introduce tiny new things on the maps after this long?
mh i can see why blizzard thinks people get confused, when they made metalopolis only cross or close air i had like 80% of my enemys in ladder scout the wrong direction first. 2-3 months later there were still like 20% scouting the wrong spot first and even nowadays you get some players scouting the wrong direction. [=low master] You may ask how is this related, well people are idiots and the creep tumor on the island thing was not gonna stay ingame, but i don't understand why they would change the amounts of minerals, wasn't the old shakuras 7min patches on every base but the main, it's probably just some ego thing to not lose control of the mappool completly and they back it up with "we balanced the game around the specific amount of minerals per base" and its confusing for newer players.
|
Sweet, only need to veto Metalopolis till it's gone also.
|
Fuck this bullshit, Blizzard just destroyed all my interest in mapping for their shitty ladder. Why they feel the need to change something that has been proven to work perfectly fine. Idiots!
I wouldn't want to see my map getting obscure changes by Blizzard and I feel deeply sorry for my fellow mapmakers who have to experience this shit.
And no, new players being confused by a half base is a ridiculous reason. First of all new players are confused by EVERYTHING and second of all they think stuff that's "non-standard" is cool anyway.
|
Metropolis will seriously be a terran favored map on ladder even if the creep tumors are present.
The main problem is the proximity to the main base. I've experimented on custom games doing the semi standard 3 orbital build. With a creep tumor you can load 1 scv into the cc, float it/unload/scan and kill the tumor. If the tumor is not there,
you can take your natural, and the island with relative ease. The map itself is very macro oriented, but because terran have medivac mechanic they can deny the island expo with ease relative to zerg or protoss. Granted zerg has nydus which is as powerful.
I have to say, gsl maps are hella awsome, seeing them on ladder is such a good thing.
three thumps up,
And get i get a wewt wewt for map pool 100% destructible debris.
|
Well, atleast the Mappool in Season 7 will be the best that we ever had.
In my opinion, Metalopolis should go first, but it´s still okay, i have vetoed this map since 3 Season now^^
I´m so happy that i can play Daybreak on Ladder next, some epic matches are incoming!
|
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted!
|
Sick map pool! I'll veto entombed and maybe TDA I guess. Metropolis looks nice, but the island expansions could be a bitch for Zerg to deal with though. Makes it interesting at least ^^
|
On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted!
There was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the....
I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily...
|
Can't wait to get my ladder on, on Daybreak Metro and Ohana, like all the maps, don't really care about the changes to the mid expo or the rocks, not really a big deal tbh..
|
This has completly ruined Daybreak.... why Blizzard please restore it!!!
|
2v2 map pool needs some serious work, not sure why they keep ignoring it.
|
4713 Posts
I know I'll probably get a lot of flak for this but.
I don't think the changes to Daybreak are as huge and as negative as people make it out to be.
What it does is allow all races to take a more forward and more aggressive 3rd instead of a more defensive 3rd.
It might be slightly more terran favored because of PFs, but I've seen zergs make due with spines, and toss with GW and cannon walls so I don't think that is an issue.
The reason why the change is in my eyes good is because it now creates an actually real choice. I've watched the GSL for a while and I can't remember the last time someone decided to take the middle base over the defensive one. The choice almost isn't there 90% of players in 90% of situations take the defensive 3rd each and every time.
On the other had everyone takes the middle base by the late game, because they need it to control space.
Now the map becomes more interesting because you have a choice between a defensive position and an offensive one.
Before it was a choice between a defensive position and an offensive one with less resources that no one every too until the late game.
Also consider, because of the size of the map and the existence of the other paths the middle base isn't too aggressive or good either. The distance from the forward 3rd to the enemy defensive 3rd is a bit shorter then the distance from nat to 3rd. On a small map like Xel'Naga Caverns I'd agree, the middle 3rd covers like 70% of the attack paths, dominates the middle and it is a gold base. Daybreak isn't in the same boat.
Lastly Daybreak is a very macro oriented and defensive map. There are indeed lots of attack paths but there are rocks blocking one of them and the other paths are very, very long. So in my opinion it might be too defensive. A perfect map in my opinion would allow aggression from the early stage that continues up till the mid then to the late game. Daybreak cuts out most of the early game stuff because of how big it is and how long the paths are.
So the change might encourage more aggression, which is good, and it does it without skewing the map into too much of an aggressive map (which isn't good either).
And lastly, why the hell are you guys complaining? We wanted a good map pool for the ladder for a long, long time, now when we finally have one you guys dare to cry? And more so when you know that Blizzard has this policy for ladder maps why are you complaining?
Either make your maps to always conform with Blizzard standards or go and argue with Blizzard about their standards, don't make a map and then be surprised and angry because they changed it, you know they will.
Since Blizzard has proven that they do listen to the community how about you guys make a combined effort to stir a educated talk to Blizzard so they change their standards. Crying here about the map changes won't do you any good, starting a well thought out discussion will do a lot more, maybe push more towards Barrin's fewer resources per base philosophy if you really hate Blizzard's standards.
|
i dont care about the rocks at all, i've never even seen anyone take those expos in GSL
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me what is so hard with copy and paste?
|
For everyone who wants a 3rd base should veto the Ohana map its terrible i played it on some playhem tours and its just LOL.
|
Blizzard insults the intelligence of the average player by thinking it's hard for them to notice a smaller base in the middle of daybreak or a neutral supply depot. LOL
Come on, give people credit. They can understand and learn.
Anyway, regardless of the changes, that is the best ladder map pool I've seen before.
|
People jumping the gun again. Going to read this thread again when in a couple of months everyone realises that Blizzard's changes didn't really do much and that the GSL maps everyone wanted in aren't as balanced as they hoped.
|
I'm excited for daybreak, metropilis looks retarted.
|
So... Looks like only Metalopolis left to veto... And maybe Tal'Darim or Korhal
|
On March 29 2012 17:21 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 16:48 Existor wrote:
I can't understand, whats bad with creep tumors at those islands?
Every faction will need some gas, time and resources to kill it. You think, zergs can destroy it easier and faster? Yes, but they need to transport Drone, using nydus for 300 minerals and 300 gas, or use Overlord drop, that costs same (100/100 speed and 200/200 for transport upgrade).
Terrans will need to wait, when creep disapears, but they can more easily destroy it, using tank splash damage, or 270-minerals scanner, or raven.
Protosses have air, cheap observer, they only need creep dissapear time. The problem is how different it reacts to races. Terrans and Zerg really doesn't care they can still take it in the same time. Protoss on the other hand is screwed. Here is what i wrote about the creep islands a while back (wall of text you have been warned) : + Show Spoiler +Gotta admit i am not liking the Neutral creep turmor island expantions. Island expantions by default always favor terran. This is not only because of lift off but also because of turrets which are superior to their counterparts because of possible Upgrades and repairs. When even Blizzard say they can't make islands balanced you really have to consider if it can work.
The problem i find with a creep tumor is also that it reacts so differently to different races.
Protoss:
Protoss are already a clear losser in terms of Island expantions because their only option for taking them is through a warp prism. Now they also have to get a Observer to make space and even then they have to wait for the creep to reside. Protoss don't really have other options for removing the tumor as stargate doesn't provide mobile detection. You could drop a cannon on island but then it is just going to take even longer to take the expansion.
Zerg:
Zerg is slightly better in this regard as they do have 2 options for getting a drone to the island. Nydus and Overlord drops. The latter is probably preferred as it doesn't give it self away instantly. Both of these require lair so the detection is not really an issue. Also once the tumor has been dealt with Zergs can instantly take the expansion as Creep doesn't prevent zerg buildings.
Terran:
As mentioned Terran already has many advantages regarding islands which is why even blizzard has given up on them. Besides Turrets and Lift off terran also have scan which gives acces to much earlier removal of the tumor, potentially through a Banshee rush. A raven could also do the job. While the creep still has to reside terrans can have their base ready and even make it an orbital before that. Once the creep goes away terrans can instantly land the finished base which overall might be even faster than what Zergs can currently do. Drops are also a much more common tactic for terran and medivacs has multible usages besides taking the expantion. Hence terran still has a clear advantage regarding these islands, with or without tumor. TLDR: Toss is royally boned in regard to the expansion, Zerg and Terran don't really care.
You are clearly a protoss player right? Zerg would have to spend 300 min 300 gas to get an island expo at tier 2! Three Hundred Gas! I think it was fine the way it was, a little bit easier for terran because they have detection and a medvac by default anyways.
|
I am kind of annoyed at blizzard for this. They could have at least shown the changes in the pictures of what they call LE. and the loading screen? I mean sure it probably wont make a difference at my crappy low level but I still would have liked to play on the versions that they showed us and which I voted on. I thought this would be an interesting way to start moving towards barrins idea of fewer resources per base and see if that is at all viable.
|
First the good: glad that Blizzard is at least improving the map pool, and making it easier for people to practice on the ladder for tournaments. Even if I don't like Ohana and the Daybreak changes are saddening, at least they're making *some* effort.
Now the ridiculous: Why do they keep changing everything? Why are things like Neutral Supply Depots, Creep tumors that block expansions, and 6m1hyg bases all too "confusing" to "casuals" to keep in, and yet things like rocks and, even more mind-bloggling, high-yield gold expansions, both of which are FAR more intrusive to gameplay, both kept in?
One step forward and two steps back, as always.
|
Might use my new veto on cloud kingdom now that shattered is gone, or on orhana depending on how bad it is.
|
More awesome maps!!
And I love that the forward base on Daybreak is now and actual expansion. I hate when I can't get 5 normal bases
Blizzard <3
|
On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily...
Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map?
|
This is freaking awesome with the exception of blizzard yet again ruining beautiful subtleties on amazing maps.
8m2g is the dumbest thing ever for the center expos on daybreak.
No neutral depots at ramps as usual is just stupid
rocks on islands instead of creep tumors... DUSTIN BROWDERRRRRR!!!!!!!!!
|
On March 29 2012 23:20 Aemilia wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily... Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map?
Ragoo knows his shit. Just because it's a GSL map does not make it good. Examples include Crossfire, Dual Sight, Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm and many many more. There have been great ones as well (Daybreak) but at this point I think the GSL mappers are putting out more bad maps then good maps.
|
Shattered was decent imo, still can't believe antiga is in the map pool...
|
I guess I'm veto'ing Taldarim, Metropolis and Korhal
|
Sigh why do they always pull this "ladder edition" crap on every good map there is.
|
I hate daybreak it such a ridic zerg favored map...
|
|
|
United States538 Posts
Among all the shit that we have given blizzard, the maps ARE getting a LOT better. I wish it would have been duel sight instead of metro though
|
On March 29 2012 17:21 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 16:48 Existor wrote:
I can't understand, whats bad with creep tumors at those islands?
Every faction will need some gas, time and resources to kill it. You think, zergs can destroy it easier and faster? Yes, but they need to transport Drone, using nydus for 300 minerals and 300 gas, or use Overlord drop, that costs same (100/100 speed and 200/200 for transport upgrade).
Terrans will need to wait, when creep disapears, but they can more easily destroy it, using tank splash damage, or 270-minerals scanner, or raven.
Protosses have air, cheap observer, they only need creep dissapear time. The problem is how different it reacts to races. Terrans and Zerg really doesn't care they can still take it in the same time. Protoss on the other hand is screwed. Here is what i wrote about the creep islands a while back (wall of text you have been warned) : + Show Spoiler +Gotta admit i am not liking the Neutral creep turmor island expantions. Island expantions by default always favor terran. This is not only because of lift off but also because of turrets which are superior to their counterparts because of possible Upgrades and repairs. When even Blizzard say they can't make islands balanced you really have to consider if it can work.
The problem i find with a creep tumor is also that it reacts so differently to different races.
Protoss:
Protoss are already a clear losser in terms of Island expantions because their only option for taking them is through a warp prism. Now they also have to get a Observer to make space and even then they have to wait for the creep to reside. Protoss don't really have other options for removing the tumor as stargate doesn't provide mobile detection. You could drop a cannon on island but then it is just going to take even longer to take the expansion.
Zerg:
Zerg is slightly better in this regard as they do have 2 options for getting a drone to the island. Nydus and Overlord drops. The latter is probably preferred as it doesn't give it self away instantly. Both of these require lair so the detection is not really an issue. Also once the tumor has been dealt with Zergs can instantly take the expansion as Creep doesn't prevent zerg buildings.
Terran:
As mentioned Terran already has many advantages regarding islands which is why even blizzard has given up on them. Besides Turrets and Lift off terran also have scan which gives acces to much earlier removal of the tumor, potentially through a Banshee rush. A raven could also do the job. While the creep still has to reside terrans can have their base ready and even make it an orbital before that. Once the creep goes away terrans can instantly land the finished base which overall might be even faster than what Zergs can currently do. Drops are also a much more common tactic for terran and medivacs has multible usages besides taking the expantion. Hence terran still has a clear advantage regarding these islands, with or without tumor. TLDR: Toss is royally boned in regard to the expansion, Zerg and Terran don't really care.
Would a neutral depot make the islands better?
People still have to invest time/resources/attention to killing it off but it's more fair for all races.
On March 30 2012 00:55 KimJongChill wrote:
Shattered was decent imo, still can't believe antiga is in the map pool...
What do you have against Antiga?
It's by far the best map Blizz ever came up with and that's without forced spawns.
|
On March 30 2012 00:52 Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 23:20 Aemilia wrote:On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily... Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map? Ragoo knows his shit. Just because it's a GSL map does not make it good. Examples include Crossfire, Dual Sight, Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm and many many more. There have been great ones as well (Daybreak) but at this point I think the GSL mappers are putting out more bad maps then good maps.
Several points:
1) If your standards for good maps are that those are horrible maps then clearly basically every map ever made bar a tiny minority are bad maps
2) I think you're taking maps out of context from the time when they were made. When Crevasse came out it was about a million times better than most other maps in existence
3) Crossfire and Dual Sight take a lot of shit but Crossfire has produced many of the greatest games ever played in Sc2 including Nestea vs sC, Nestea vs TOP and Clide vs Tester. Another thing is that a lot of people whine that there's no unique maps but Crossfire is a genuinely unique map that requires it's own strategies and produces many great and unique games, but people still shit on it.
4) I mean no offence to ESV but by comparison to GSL your maps are barely played. I feel a lot of people bandwagon on all ESV maps and say how awesome they are when the majority have barely been tested in tournament play at all. People also confuse a map getting old/boring with it being bad.
Taldarim Alter is the best map ever made. It's dull now sure because it's been around too long but that map was a gigantic leap forward for Sc2 and has produced countless amazing games as well as setting many of the standard every new map has.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 29 2012 18:35 Morfildur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 18:22 yoigen wrote:
As if the 8 minerals patches on daybreak would change anything.
get real
They extra minerals and gas change the map dynamic completely. Before, it was a decision between: i take that base and gain map control but have lower gas income, which means slower tech vs i take the other base, have higher income and therefor faster tech but i won't gain the map control. Now it's "yay, good income + map control" It will mostly play a role in XvT matchups since terrans can place a PF with some tanks there, but it's still a huge change.
As a terran you want your 3rd most of the times to be an orbital, so you would take this expansion as your 4th. Economy shouldn't really be a problem, since you won't have that many scvs to saturate all your bases perfectly anyway. In most games your tech will be fully developed by then, and for things such as mass raven you should have your complete half of the map.
I don't really see taking this base as a 3rd with a planetary being useful. Against protoss you need the 3rd mule to get ahead economically and against Zerg i don't wanna miss the extra scan and mule either.
Without a planetary it is hard to defend compared to the normal 3rd, because it is very open and you can be attacked from 3 different angles.
just my 2cents
|
I was so hopeful Blizzard would keep the maps as intended. They've gotten so much better as of late. -sigh-.
|
|
|
Wtf is wrong with blizzard, the things they change make no fucking sense <.<
Oh and seriously out with metalopolis already...
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 30 2012 02:13 Aemilia wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 00:52 Diamond wrote:On March 29 2012 23:20 Aemilia wrote:On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily... Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map? Ragoo knows his shit. Just because it's a GSL map does not make it good. Examples include Crossfire, Dual Sight, Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm and many many more. There have been great ones as well (Daybreak) but at this point I think the GSL mappers are putting out more bad maps then good maps. Several points: 1) If your standards for good maps are that those are horrible maps then clearly basically every map ever made bar a tiny minority are bad maps 2) I think you're taking maps out of context from the time when they were made. When Crevasse came out it was about a million times better than most other maps in existence 3) Crossfire and Dual Sight take a lot of shit but Crossfire has produced many of the greatest games ever played in Sc2 including Nestea vs sC, Nestea vs TOP and Clide vs Tester. Another thing is that a lot of people whine that there's no unique maps but Crossfire is a genuinely unique map that requires it's own strategies and produces many great and unique games, but people still shit on it. 4) I mean no offence to ESV but by comparison to GSL your maps are barely played. I feel a lot of people bandwagon on all ESV maps and say how awesome they are when the majority have barely been tested in tournament play at all. People also confuse a map getting old/boring with it being bad. Taldarim Alter is the best map ever made. It's dull now sure because it's been around too long but that map was a gigantic leap forward for Sc2 and has produced countless amazing games as well as setting many of the standard every new map has.
People shit on crossfire because there's an entire race (Protoss) that can't play well on it. Taking a third on that map is almost impossible unless you have a huge lead as toss.
Tal'darim altar is in no way shape or form the best map ever made. PvP is awful on that map. Taking a fourth base is difficult, after you have your third expanding becomes very very hard, there simply is no logical fourth. Daybreak is a much MUCH better map. Siege tanks are way too good on tal'darim because of the design of the natural. Mutalisks are way too good on it because of how easy it is to bounce between the main and third.
We don't care about when the maps were made, because what is relevant is how the maps perform now. We need good maps for today's games.
|
Honestly, anything new is better then Blizz old maps. If Blizz wants to make maps they should have one guy snort glorious amounts of cocaine/with alcohol, leave him in one room for 8 hours and he'll exit with a better map then their designers couldve made. Cocaine, mmmmm.
|
I must say I'm pleasantly surprised. I was fully expecting blizzard to put rocks at the 3rd on all those maps.
|
The presence of islands on Metro seems to me to indicate that Zergs and Protoss have to get either overlord transport or warp prism or an airborne attacking unit before any base trades. That seems like a pretty big advantage for Terrans, no?
|
On March 30 2012 03:53 kawaiiryuko wrote:
The presence of islands on Metro seems to me to indicate that Zergs and Protoss have to get either overlord transport or warp prism or an airborne attacking unit before any base trades. That seems like a pretty big advantage for Terrans, no?
Considering how long the distances are, this is anything but a terran map.
The situation you describe is extremely rare.
|
On March 29 2012 21:24 Destructicon wrote:
I know I'll probably get a lot of flak for this but.
I don't think the changes to Daybreak are as huge and as negative as people make it out to be.
What it does is allow all races to take a more forward and more aggressive 3rd instead of a more defensive 3rd.
It might be slightly more terran favored because of PFs, but I've seen zergs make due with spines, and toss with GW and cannon walls so I don't think that is an issue.
The reason why the change is in my eyes good is because it now creates an actually real choice. I've watched the GSL for a while and I can't remember the last time someone decided to take the middle base over the defensive one. The choice almost isn't there 90% of players in 90% of situations take the defensive 3rd each and every time.
On the other had everyone takes the middle base by the late game, because they need it to control space.
Now the map becomes more interesting because you have a choice between a defensive position and an offensive one.
Before it was a choice between a defensive position and an offensive one with less resources that no one every too until the late game.
Also consider, because of the size of the map and the existence of the other paths the middle base isn't too aggressive or good either. The distance from the forward 3rd to the enemy defensive 3rd is a bit shorter then the distance from nat to 3rd. On a small map like Xel'Naga Caverns I'd agree, the middle 3rd covers like 70% of the attack paths, dominates the middle and it is a gold base. Daybreak isn't in the same boat.
Lastly Daybreak is a very macro oriented and defensive map. There are indeed lots of attack paths but there are rocks blocking one of them and the other paths are very, very long. So in my opinion it might be too defensive. A perfect map in my opinion would allow aggression from the early stage that continues up till the mid then to the late game. Daybreak cuts out most of the early game stuff because of how big it is and how long the paths are.
So the change might encourage more aggression, which is good, and it does it without skewing the map into too much of an aggressive map (which isn't good either).
And lastly, why the hell are you guys complaining? We wanted a good map pool for the ladder for a long, long time, now when we finally have one you guys dare to cry? And more so when you know that Blizzard has this policy for ladder maps why are you complaining?
Either make your maps to always conform with Blizzard standards or go and argue with Blizzard about their standards, don't make a map and then be surprised and angry because they changed it, you know they will.
Since Blizzard has proven that they do listen to the community how about you guys make a combined effort to stir a educated talk to Blizzard so they change their standards. Crying here about the map changes won't do you any good, starting a well thought out discussion will do a lot more, maybe push more towards Barrin's fewer resources per base philosophy if you really hate Blizzard's standards.
The problem is this:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sGmgj.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VTZe4.png)
Notice the difference in the two pictures. In the first, once your army is aggressively positioned, you have two paths of attack, either because one is too well defended, because you want to pull your opponent out of position, or because you want to take advantage of numerical/supply superiority. Both attack paths are relatively the same distance for both you and your opponent.
Now look at the second picture. There's no longer an aggressive forward positioning. This is because three of the main attack paths all lead to the same spot, which is already going to be a defensive position. The last attack path is something like three times the distance, but still runs by the forward base, with little distance for your opponent to run over to defend, either sideways or backwards into his natural. This forward base is also relatively the same distance from the natural as the current third.
The problem is that they've turned it into another Blizzard map. That is to say, they've removed any semblance of strategic possibility in favor of dumbing down the game for the casuals.
|
On March 30 2012 03:27 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 02:13 Aemilia wrote:On March 30 2012 00:52 Diamond wrote:On March 29 2012 23:20 Aemilia wrote:On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily... Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map? Ragoo knows his shit. Just because it's a GSL map does not make it good. Examples include Crossfire, Dual Sight, Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm and many many more. There have been great ones as well (Daybreak) but at this point I think the GSL mappers are putting out more bad maps then good maps. Several points: 1) If your standards for good maps are that those are horrible maps then clearly basically every map ever made bar a tiny minority are bad maps 2) I think you're taking maps out of context from the time when they were made. When Crevasse came out it was about a million times better than most other maps in existence 3) Crossfire and Dual Sight take a lot of shit but Crossfire has produced many of the greatest games ever played in Sc2 including Nestea vs sC, Nestea vs TOP and Clide vs Tester. Another thing is that a lot of people whine that there's no unique maps but Crossfire is a genuinely unique map that requires it's own strategies and produces many great and unique games, but people still shit on it. 4) I mean no offence to ESV but by comparison to GSL your maps are barely played. I feel a lot of people bandwagon on all ESV maps and say how awesome they are when the majority have barely been tested in tournament play at all. People also confuse a map getting old/boring with it being bad. Taldarim Alter is the best map ever made. It's dull now sure because it's been around too long but that map was a gigantic leap forward for Sc2 and has produced countless amazing games as well as setting many of the standard every new map has. People shit on crossfire because there's an entire race (Protoss) that can't play well on it. Taking a third on that map is almost impossible unless you have a huge lead as toss. Tal'darim altar is in no way shape or form the best map ever made. PvP is awful on that map. Taking a fourth base is difficult, after you have your third expanding becomes very very hard, there simply is no logical fourth. Daybreak is a much MUCH better map. Siege tanks are way too good on tal'darim because of the design of the natural. Mutalisks are way too good on it because of how easy it is to bounce between the main and third. We don't care about when the maps were made, because what is relevant is how the maps perform now. We need good maps for today's games.
Perhaps this is too hard a subject for you to understand.
Think of it this way,
July is not shit at Brood War. But strictly speaking, he's pretty bad right now.
Taldarim Alter is not a shit map, it's actually the most revolutionary map so far in Sc2. The fact it's a bit dated doesn't change the fact that it has been a great map. Not to mention that when it was released, every PvP was 4 gate vs 4 gate.
and Protoss have won games on Crossfire, not to mention that most of Crossfire's run was at a time when Protoss was losing on every map.
|
4713 Posts
Tropical Bob, thanks for the replay, you raised some good points but I believe I can counter a bit.
While indeed in a regular game now where someone takes his regular 3rd the attack paths will be nearly the same distance and it is useful for pulling someone out of position, it becomes irrelevant in the late game when everyone is forced to take the middle base because of its defensive properties, if they where to take the top most or bottom most bases then basically the enemy then can stage attacks from one point into 3 other points.
And there really isn't a choice now a days, almost everyone takes his regular 3rd and later takes the mid base, the game play is stale in that sense since there isn't much strategic choice involving the map in that sense.
Now if you where to take the middle base as a 3rd, yes you get a bit more security for your natural expansion, and a more aggressive forward position, but you're sacrificing defensive potential, that base as you highlighted, can be sieged from 4 different angles, and it always blows my mind how no one exploits that fact and everyone always comes just from one direction or another. In light of that fact and given that no one takes the middle base until the late game, I don't see how this change impacts the map in a negative way, it opens up other strategic choices and counter choices.
|
Y'all are just being crybabies. The xel naga on daybreak was always a defensive position, Having your third there doesn't change that. I really don't see why people shouldn't still take the back third despite the normal one because it's very easy to push that base due to the 3 attack routes.
People on this site are never happy! Grow up, this isn't subway, you can't always have it your own deluded way.
|
On March 29 2012 13:43 TheButtonmen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2012 11:27 Mr Showtime wrote:On March 29 2012 11:09 Ares[Effort] wrote:
Blizzard is fucking stupid Since I would get warned/banned for making a comment like that, you could at least give us an explanation. They aren't doing everything right, but I don't see any horrifying news in my opinion. Blizzard editied the GSL maps to reflect their bland oatmeal style by adding rocks, mineral patches and geysers to expansions.
Well then...... Blizzard is fucking stupid.
|
People keep complaining lol.. I'm happy.
Remember steppes of war and delta quadrant? at least we are moving in the right direction
|
|
|
Why do people hate metropolis? Looks like a fun map...
|
On March 29 2012 10:51 Misanthrope wrote:
Metropolis is just ugly. Reminds me of the map they put in a long time ago that looked almost exactly like it and was only slightly worse. They kept entombed? Wtf?
Slag pits... was that one?
The map is nicer and i think it doesnt have a siegable main.
|
On March 30 2012 06:37 dangerjoe wrote:
People keep complaining lol.. I'm happy.
Remember steppes of war and delta quadrant? at least we are moving in the right direction
Blizzard went from short rush distance maps with rocks at unnessecary locations and every expansion being bland and samey to long rush distance maps with rocks at unnessecary locations and every expansion being bland. I give them credit for at least progressing beyond the terrible rush distances now they just need to allow the maps to be interesting in other ways. Daybreak was an interesting map in that the expansions with less resources made you think about whether or not you wanted to safely take it or take the risk and take the full 4th which was vulnerable. Holding that location is already powerful enough without a full expansion being there making it a location with no negatives.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 30 2012 04:58 Aemilia wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 03:27 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 02:13 Aemilia wrote:On March 30 2012 00:52 Diamond wrote:On March 29 2012 23:20 Aemilia wrote:On March 29 2012 20:58 Ragoo wrote:On March 29 2012 20:56 CaptainCrush wrote:
Awful lot of whining in here.... I dont really see the big deal of making a 6min1g into a normal expansion. Grow up children, we at least get some awesome maps this season and we had a chance to vote for which ones we wanted! Their was barely any choice cos most of the GSL maps are horrible tbh. Dual Sight? Xel'Naga Fortress? what the.... I only liked Daybreak and they changed that unnecessarily... Have to laugh at some people. So if GSL maps are horrible, what exactly is a good map? Ragoo knows his shit. Just because it's a GSL map does not make it good. Examples include Crossfire, Dual Sight, Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm and many many more. There have been great ones as well (Daybreak) but at this point I think the GSL mappers are putting out more bad maps then good maps. Several points: 1) If your standards for good maps are that those are horrible maps then clearly basically every map ever made bar a tiny minority are bad maps 2) I think you're taking maps out of context from the time when they were made. When Crevasse came out it was about a million times better than most other maps in existence 3) Crossfire and Dual Sight take a lot of shit but Crossfire has produced many of the greatest games ever played in Sc2 including Nestea vs sC, Nestea vs TOP and Clide vs Tester. Another thing is that a lot of people whine that there's no unique maps but Crossfire is a genuinely unique map that requires it's own strategies and produces many great and unique games, but people still shit on it. 4) I mean no offence to ESV but by comparison to GSL your maps are barely played. I feel a lot of people bandwagon on all ESV maps and say how awesome they are when the majority have barely been tested in tournament play at all. People also confuse a map getting old/boring with it being bad. Taldarim Alter is the best map ever made. It's dull now sure because it's been around too long but that map was a gigantic leap forward for Sc2 and has produced countless amazing games as well as setting many of the standard every new map has. People shit on crossfire because there's an entire race (Protoss) that can't play well on it. Taking a third on that map is almost impossible unless you have a huge lead as toss. Tal'darim altar is in no way shape or form the best map ever made. PvP is awful on that map. Taking a fourth base is difficult, after you have your third expanding becomes very very hard, there simply is no logical fourth. Daybreak is a much MUCH better map. Siege tanks are way too good on tal'darim because of the design of the natural. Mutalisks are way too good on it because of how easy it is to bounce between the main and third. We don't care about when the maps were made, because what is relevant is how the maps perform now. We need good maps for today's games. Perhaps this is too hard a subject for you to understand. Think of it this way, July is not shit at Brood War. But strictly speaking, he's pretty bad right now. Taldarim Alter is not a shit map, it's actually the most revolutionary map so far in Sc2. The fact it's a bit dated doesn't change the fact that it has been a great map. Not to mention that when it was released, every PvP was 4 gate vs 4 gate. and Protoss have won games on Crossfire, not to mention that most of Crossfire's run was at a time when Protoss was losing on every map.
Perhaps this is too hard a subject for you to understand.
A map's quality is only relevant at the present level of play. A map that used to be good that isn't good now is not a good map. It doesn't matter how useful the map was at the time when discussing what maps are good now, it isn't a map that's good now, period. This entire thread is about what maps we'll be seeing going forward and what maps people want gone. Tal'darim has outlived it's usefulness and needs to go. Being the best map in a selection of absolutely abysmal maps at the time does not make it a good map, it just means it's not as bad as the horrendous garbage that fills the rest of the map pool.
Protoss only wins on Crossfire with one base all-ins and two base all-ins. Taking a third is impossible unless you've pretty much got a huge lead. That's a terrible map. Zerg can take a third on crossfire with difficulty, because creep helps negate the distance. Terran has a relatively easy time of taking the third with planetary fortresses, and it's hard for them too.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 30 2012 06:55 Sniperdadx wrote:
Why do people hate metropolis? Looks like a fun map...
No idea, it's a pretty good map.
|
Many might disagree, but I didn't like the idea of rich gas. It's kinda confusing to suddenly have only single 0.75 base out of all maps.
Instead, why don't Blizzard make 0.5 base =4m1g official? It is easy to understand, and plays similar role.
I think Blizzard can even include this "half-expansion" in tutorial and help so that even new players can get familiar with it.
Introducing more half expansion would bring interesting positional games.
My concern is that Blizzard doesn't do a good job of "forcing" players to know some map features. Some players are still unaware of no close spawns in Shattered and Shakuras. Introducing rich gas without any announcement at loading screen or something wouldn't work well. Don't expect everyone to watch GSL. Some people just play ladder, and get no information outside Battlenet 2.0. The game should cater to those people as well.
|
On March 30 2012 08:58 Orek wrote:
Many might disagree, but I didn't like the idea of rich gas. It's kinda confusing to suddenly have only single 0.75 base out of all maps.
Instead, why don't Blizzard make 0.5 base =4m1g official? It is easy to understand, and plays similar role.
I think Blizzard can even include this "half-expansion" in tutorial and help so that even new players can get familiar with it.
Introducing more half expansion would bring interesting positional games.
My concern is that Blizzard doesn't do a good job of "forcing" players to know some map features. Some players are still unaware of no close spawns in Shattered and Shakuras. Introducing rich gas without any announcement at loading screen or something wouldn't work well. Don't expect everyone to watch GSL. Some people just play ladder, and get no information outside Battlenet 2.0. The game should cater to those people as well.
If people don't play enough to know that Shattered and Shakuras have close spawns disabled, having the 4th base as a 6m1hyg isn't really going to affect them to be honest. They'll barely feel the difference.
|
On March 30 2012 05:19 Destructicon wrote:
Tropical Bob, thanks for the replay, you raised some good points but I believe I can counter a bit.
While indeed in a regular game now where someone takes his regular 3rd the attack paths will be nearly the same distance and it is useful for pulling someone out of position, it becomes irrelevant in the late game when everyone is forced to take the middle base because of its defensive properties, if they where to take the top most or bottom most bases then basically the enemy then can stage attacks from one point into 3 other points.
And there really isn't a choice now a days, almost everyone takes his regular 3rd and later takes the mid base, the game play is stale in that sense since there isn't much strategic choice involving the map in that sense.
Now if you where to take the middle base as a 3rd, yes you get a bit more security for your natural expansion, and a more aggressive forward position, but you're sacrificing defensive potential, that base as you highlighted, can be sieged from 4 different angles, and it always blows my mind how no one exploits that fact and everyone always comes just from one direction or another. In light of that fact and given that no one takes the middle base until the late game, I don't see how this change impacts the map in a negative way, it opens up other strategic choices and counter choices.
The strategic choice is there to take the reduced base as a third, though. Most people choose not to, I assume, because they feel like they can hold whatever possible split push and be rewarded with a higher income.
But now there's no real choice. Both bases yield the same income, but one is naturally more defensive in nature. There's no advantage to the rear one except in PvZ, where it's easier to wall with buildings and Force Fields.
|
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining.
|
On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining.
Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games.
That's what makes it awesome!
|
Metalopolis is still there. I'm disappointed.
Then again, it's Blizzard. I don't know what I was expecting.
|
On March 30 2012 09:48 Shinespark wrote:
Metalopolis is still there. I'm disappointed.
Then again, it's Blizzard. I don't know what I was expecting.
It may be stale, but it's a decent map. That's not where they went wrong here.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 30 2012 09:55 Mr Showtime wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 09:48 Shinespark wrote:
Metalopolis is still there. I'm disappointed.
Then again, it's Blizzard. I don't know what I was expecting. It may be stale, but it's a decent map. That's not where they went wrong here.
It's not a decent map, it's awful >_<.
That's okay though, I have vetos for a reason.
|
Those are NOT the GSL-maps, GSL-Maps got neutral supplydepots and for example daybreak only 6Mineralpatch 1gas at middle base.
Those LE are just bad, why use the GSL-maps than anyway?
|
Any of these maps are better than shattered.
Also, I'm glad there's no 4-spawn map in the list. There's already some, and I personally don't like them.
Ohana and Daybreak both seem a bit similar and quite macro-y (3 bases close together and easily defendable), which is a little boring, so I think I'd choose Metropolis even though I'm not a fan of that map particularly either.
If— for instance Daybreak was GSL version, I'd choose it.
|
On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome!
unless youre terran
|
has metropolis always had two island expansions?
|
I'd love to see them add some old maps back in the pool occasionally Blistering Sands!!
|
On March 31 2012 06:13 Angel_ wrote:
has metropolis always had two island expansions?
Yes.
|
Not sure I like the map pool going up to 10 maps
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran
I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map.
|
On March 31 2012 09:56 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map.
Yeah the terrans that have 300apm and can play long macro games against toss/zerg
|
I think Plexa(?) called it immediately that they're going to change the bases on Daybreak...
And if you think about it... I'm not surprised either.
|
On March 31 2012 11:17 XquisiteWretch wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 09:56 Whitewing wrote:On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map. Yeah the terrans that have 300apm and can play long macro games against toss/zerg
I think defensive mech play with some hellion harass should work really well tvz on that map (not that apm intensive). T can defend 5 bases from a common choke point.
|
On March 31 2012 11:17 XquisiteWretch wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 09:56 Whitewing wrote:On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map. Yeah the terrans that have 300apm and can play long macro games against toss/zerg
..So get better? The maps aren't horrifically imbalanced. No need to be entitled to entirely simple maps because you refuse to be a better player.
|
On March 31 2012 11:17 XquisiteWretch wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 09:56 Whitewing wrote:On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map. Yeah the terrans that have 300apm and can play long macro games against toss/zerg
That's such a terrible argument, dropping two places at once while advancing an army does not take progamer APM at all...
Pure bio, and mech are especially strong on that map, with marine tank still being viable.
TBH it's one of my least favorite maps to play vs T on, next to tal darim altar.
|
On March 31 2012 11:28 KhAmun wrote:Show nested quote +On March 31 2012 11:17 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 31 2012 09:56 Whitewing wrote:On March 31 2012 06:03 XquisiteWretch wrote:On March 30 2012 09:35 Whitewing wrote:On March 30 2012 09:28 VoirDire wrote:On March 30 2012 09:22 Eee wrote:
I enjoy metropolis quite a lot, don't know why people are complaining. Because 50%+ of all the games on that map is 5 base vs 5 base 40 min+ games. That's what makes it awesome! unless youre terran I dunno man, good terrans seem to do really well on the map. Yeah the terrans that have 300apm and can play long macro games against toss/zerg That's such a terrible argument, dropping two places at once while advancing an army does not take progamer APM at all... Pure bio, and mech are especially strong on that map, with marine tank still being viable. TBH it's one of my least favorite maps to play vs T on, next to tal darim altar.
Lol seriously? what maps to you like playing terran on? Those are the best maps for zerg, you just must be terrible... wide open maps with TONS of expos, few chokes, yea, you probably just suck if you dont like those maps
|
So excited, ladder is gonna be so much more fun on these maps :D
|
Never really noticed untill now how Metropolis is basically a carbon copy of slag pits..... Prolly gonna check that one off.
|
On March 31 2012 23:07 Arkless wrote:
Never really noticed untill now how Metropolis is basically a carbon copy of slag pits..... Prolly gonna check that one off.
Uhm, except it doesn't have ridiculously close spawns and extremely open naturals?...
|
Man i almost feel a little sentimental about Shattered Temple, played that map for so long. Prefer it over Metapolis actually, but I'm still very happy that we are getting new good ladder maps
|
Aww, shattered temple was one of my favorite maps.
|
People love complaining. Nothing ever changes.
|
On March 31 2012 23:59 Nimic wrote:
People love complaining. Nothing ever changes.
Way to complain about people complaining, thats not hypocritical AT ALL
|
People complain as if you have a say.
Most players are from the West and spoiled in countries where democracy is valued.
Make no mistake, this is Blizzard dictatorship. You play by their rules, of just die.
All you can do is to start a revolution to change the regime at a big risk, which in this case means quitting the game.
I support Blizzard dectatorship. It's not the best, but far better than mob rule.
|
i hope we get another teamliquid mapcontest for the coming seasons, but great to see so many custom maps in season7!
|
On April 01 2012 00:41 Terranlover wrote:
i hope we get another teamliquid mapcontest for the coming seasons, but great to see so many custom maps in season7!
They are not custom maps, blizz changed key-features so they are just blizzard maps-.-
|
This is ridiculous. Every single smaller map in the pool is now gone. All we have now are big maps. No variety at all
|
On April 09 2012 02:28 kofman wrote:
This is ridiculous. Every single smaller map in the pool is now gone. All we have now are big maps. No variety at all ´
Yeah but The shattered temple was a old bad map. If someone makes a really good small map, throw it in.
|
|
|
On April 09 2012 02:28 kofman wrote:
This is ridiculous. Every single smaller map in the pool is now gone. All we have now are big maps. No variety at all
Cloud Kingdom is as small as Xelnaga caverns, trust me.
|
Obviously no one here came from WC3. The map pool was the same for 4+ years.
I am excite. I currently can't stand Metropolis but I've only played it a couple times so far so that may change. I agree with the people bagging on Korhal Compound though, that map is pretty bad haha
|
When will the season 7 start???? Its 10th April already
|
On April 10 2012 07:52 An2quamaraN wrote:
When will the season 7 start???? Its 10th April already
April 9nth in the US. I imagine SEA server starts sometime today, NA tomorrow, EU wednesday, korea thursday.
|
United States97276 Posts
Are there any changes to any of these maps from the tournament versions? Your pictures show the 6m1g for daybreak but blizz usually likes to keep everything pretty standardized. No random destructible rocks added, right?
|
I don't know why Metropolis got more votes than Dual Sight or Crevasse. It really surprised me when Dual Sight and Crevasse were some of the least voted for. Is it because people don't like those maps, or is it because they have been out for so long that they are no longer "new" and "exciting"? Metropolis seems rather lifeless. It is so big that it makes games feel slow. Dual Sight and Crevasse are really exciting maps that are extremely well done too. I like Daybreak, but no where near as much as Dual Sight or Crevasse.
|
On April 10 2012 08:05 KJSharp wrote:
I don't know why Metropolis got more votes than Dual Sight or Crevasse. It really surprised me when Dual Sight and Crevasse were some of the least voted for. Is it because people don't like those maps, or is it because they have been out for so long that they are no longer "new" and "exciting"? Metropolis seems rather lifeless. It is so big that it makes games feel slow. Dual Sight and Crevasse are really exciting maps that are extremely well done too. I like Daybreak, but no where near as much as Dual Sight or Crevasse.
Crevasse is extremely old, and would be broken because blizzard says all bases must have 8m2g so terran and protoss would just nexus/cc first and then two base allin without fail, as there would be no reason to expand past two bases.
Dual sight is completely imbalanced against protoss as zerg or terran, and pretty damn favourable for zerg in zvt as well.
|
I don't like Metropolis LE because of its "island" expos.
|
Metropolis is horrible... too many stupid people were allowed to vote. That being said, Ill give it a shot, but I have played it in a few customs and I thought it completely sucked.
I still like the voting option Blizz gave us, I guess one bad map + one good map in the ladder is still a good thing overall.
|
I am going to have a panic attack before I begin my first ladder game in season 7. I can't believe my childhood dream has come true: getting a map in ladder <3
Hope you all enjoy ohana!
|
On April 10 2012 14:17 IronManSC wrote:
I am going to have a panic attack before I begin my first ladder game in season 7. I can't believe my childhood dream has come true: getting a map in ladder <3
Hope you all enjoy ohana!
Gratz looks like a sick map :D
|
Good changes to the map pool. Sad, that they changed Daybreak, but oh well, a small sacrifice for a large gain, imo.
|
On April 10 2012 08:09 Tazerenix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 08:05 KJSharp wrote:
I don't know why Metropolis got more votes than Dual Sight or Crevasse. It really surprised me when Dual Sight and Crevasse were some of the least voted for. Is it because people don't like those maps, or is it because they have been out for so long that they are no longer "new" and "exciting"? Metropolis seems rather lifeless. It is so big that it makes games feel slow. Dual Sight and Crevasse are really exciting maps that are extremely well done too. I like Daybreak, but no where near as much as Dual Sight or Crevasse. Crevasse is extremely old, and would be broken because blizzard says all bases must have 8m2g so terran and protoss would just nexus/cc first and then two base allin without fail, as there would be no reason to expand past two bases. Dual sight is completely imbalanced against protoss as zerg or terran, and pretty damn favourable for zerg in zvt as well.
Most people I know, of all races, like Dual Sight a lot. I have had some really fun games on it. Also, it is a smaller map, and I feel like we need some smaller maps. Perhaps the small-medium size of Dual Sight makes people like to play on it even if it is slightly imbalanced? I'm Terran and I enjoy playing Zerg on that map, even though Zerg has an advantage (taking your word for it). Now we'll have 2 huge maps (metropolis and Tal'Darim) and a bunch of large maps (Daybreak, Korhal Compound, Entombed Valley, Antiga Shipyard, and Cloud Kingdom). The only ones that aren't large are Shakuras, Metalopolis, and Ohana, and I expect the first two of those to be phased out soon because they are older maps.
Oh well, at least Ohana is being added. That map is a ton of fun!
|
On April 10 2012 08:10 Fealthas wrote:
I don't like Metropolis LE because of its "island" expos.
Who cares, no one ever takes them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0Vi2X.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2msrJ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/T51hO.jpg)
