There doesn't seem to be a thread yet. If so, just close this one.
Season 8, which begins the week of June 11, will bring with it some changes to the 1v1 and 2v2 map pools. In season 7, we experimented with a larger 1v1 map pool. After reviewing player feedback, we’ll be returning to a pool of 8 maps. We will continue to maintain a heavy focus on tournament viable 1v1 maps, and that thought process has influenced our decisions regarding which maps will be removed from the ladder for Season 8.
The new maps are playable now! You can experience them via the custom game interface now, and they’ll join the ladder when the new season starts next week.
1v1 map pool
Map being added:
(4) Condemned Ridge
We’ve received feedback from our higher levels players that rotationally symmetric macro maps can be difficult to deal with for certain races when they spawn at certain points. On the other hand, non-rotationally symmetric maps are not common on the tournament circuits. To add variety, we’re introducing a new symmetric, potentially tournament viable map, suitable for macro style play.
The map hasn’t been finalized yet, and we would like to hear your opinions about how it plays before the Season 8 begins. Your feedback is appreciated!
Update 4:30 p.m. PDT June 6, 2012: We have decided to remove rocks from Condemned Ridge. Thank you for your feedback.
This change is not live at this time, but will be pushed soon.
Maps being removed:
This season, tournament viability was our primary criteria regarding whether a map remained on the ladder or not, though map balance is also always a consideration.
(4) Metalopolis
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season.
(4) Korhal Compound LE
This map was one of the winners of the Team Liquid Map Contest. While we were pleased to make this addition to the ladder, unfortunately, Korhal Compound hasn’t gained traction in the tournament scene. In addition, this version of Korhal Compound also has some balance issues.
We'll continue to watch Korhal Compound Tournament Edition, and if it gains traction in tournaments then that version of the map may come back to the ladder in the future.
2v2 map pool
The 2v2 map pool will continue to feature maps with close spawn positions. Main difference in this format is we’re not aiming for a 100% fortress style maps only, and including a semi fortress map also. In team games, we try to make the gameplay and layout of maps relatively simple to ease coordination between teammates. The maps should mostly be self-explanatory using the screenshots. Like Condemned Ridge these maps aren’t final, and we welcome your feedback.
Maps being added:
(4) Molten Crater
This map is a semi fortress style map.
(4) Desolate Stronghold
This map is a fortress style map lacking easy expansion within the fortress area.
Maps being removed:
(4) Discord IV
(4) High Orbit
While we did not feel that the feel that the existing 2v2 map pool suffered from any significant issues, we wanted to breathe some new life into the ladder pool. Since we wanted to stay with an 8 map pool in this bracket, it became necessary to remove a pair of the older maps.
We plan to both introduce new maps to the 2v2 pool on occasion as well as potentially cycle old map back into rotation, so even though these two maps are gone for now, they could return in future seasons.
Condemned Ridge looks a lot like Shakuras... nothing really special about it, just a typical map really. Looks pretty easy to take three bases and hard to take a fourth.
Looks like you can abuse the hell out of that cliff next to the third using siege tanks, could make for interesting situations TvT/TvZ.
I'm really very dissapointed with the updates to the 2v2 map pool. I often play 2v2 with friends or just to relax, but it has got to the point where the map pool has become so stagnant and boring that it's not really much fun to play anymore.
As it's 2v2, it doesn't have to be (perhaps cannot be?) perfectly balanced, which gives Blizzard the opportunity to create some really interesting maps. So why is the 2v2 map pool so old and boring? Not to mention actually expanding and getting based 1 or 2 base play is almost impossible on some of the maps!
"While we did not feel that the feel that the existing 2v2 map pool suffered from any significant issues, we wanted to breathe some new life into the ladder pool." - I for one would be more happy with a completely new set of maps.
Why does Blizzard refuse to use half bases. Third base half bases would be so nice but no... better put rocks at the third. Well to give them some credit this isn't their worst map and it even has some interesting feature with that cliff over the third. But meh, 4p mirrored maps are just so boring and shitty, having Metropolis is more than enough for me.
Also the "imbalance" of close positions in rotational maps is actually interesting. It just has to be done right. Kinda glad Blizzard didn't attempt it cos they wouldn't have gotten it right anyway.
Hoping to see a new TLMC soon so we can see some good community maps added.
I really hope the shit maps Blizzard will come up with for HotS won't be played in many tournaments.
edit: Also nice joke about Korhal Tournament Edition Blizzard. You realize maps don't get into tournaments at all right (unless you're Korean and work with GSL)? That's one of the big problems for mapmaking~
And that second 2v2 map... do more 2v2 maps have so few bases? Looks weird. Maybe we mapmakers should make some 2v2 maps for the community...
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Excellent question. I like looking at a map that doesn't feel so dull or even depressing. A Beach type map is so underused it's silly.
I'm glad Metalo and Korhal are gone though.
Underused? Ohana is on ladder and all tournaments and Bel'Shir Beach has been in many tournaments as well. Definitely not underused. 2 maps with the same style being used in many tournaments/ladder at this point is above average~
I'm not sure what to think of the new map. It looks like a smaller version of Whirlwind at first glance, and North/south or east/west spawn positions might be a bit tricky. I wonder why Blizzard doesn't more actively keep only certain spawns active, it's the reason I still veto Antiga even though I'd love to play on it if it were cross-only.
The ridge behind the third boggles my mind. Put tanks there for drop defense? Drop tanks there for WTF TANK HARASS? I guess I like that they're trying to keep tournaments their top consideration, so even if this flops at least they're headed that way.
My biggest critique: The HUGE amount of dead airspace behind bases is stupid. It's a design flaw on any map in my opinion, as it lets an harasser whether it be with mutas, medvacs, or prisms, just fucking let it set out there in the corner afk until they need it. It's single-player campaign level shit. It makes "base defense" a matter of just "Don't fucking leave cause the instant you do he's just gonna grab that fucking afk medvac sitting there with its thumb up its ass (or mutas, etc), and rape your base."
It makes base defense silly, because it becomes less about position and army splitting and more about never leaving your base. It makes harass mind-numbingly stupid when you can just sit your attacker out in the corner. You should have to pay attention to the units you send to attack, and have to make smart decisions about escape routes, because you don't want to fly over their AA, not just "Ok I go back to corner now." Base defense would be much more intuitive, you'd have to split your defenders to cover the path he wants to escape over, while still leaving enough to fight the actual drop/harass, and hey, if you did so intelligently you would be rewarded with a chance to leave your fucking base.
Sorry for the rant, but the giant amounts of dead space is just stupid, and lots of maps have it.
Overall, I can't make any other claims about this map until I try it tonight, but at least they're working with some good objectives in mind.
Thank god Metalopolis and Korhal Compound are finally out of the map pool, but my god...they replace it with this?
Of course they had to add some flavor to the map, so lets throw rocks at the 3rd! Wait...rocks aren't good enough? Then how about a ramp leading up to a ledge behind its mineral line! Ya!
So they remove metalopolis finally keep tal darim in :S and yet to add Metrolopolis back in? Even though they are FINALLY citing to make the 1v1 ladder pool, like one of a tournament map pool. Interesting.
And yet they continue to support 3 pylon / bunker blocks at the natural. I love the fact they removed the neutral bunkers from Cloud and Daybreak to make it possible, truly Ladder Editions .
I think the new map should replace shakuras :D Seems like Blizzard finally learned how to make decent maps, no gold and so on. Anyway, thank god Korhal and Metal is out, there go my 2 bans.
On June 08 2012 22:59 soon.Cloak wrote: lol I wonder whose idea it was to add that ridge behind the third. Just asking for tank harass. But that's an easy, easy third- big fan.
On June 08 2012 22:57 Fueled wrote: Thank god Metalopolis and Korhal Compound are finally out of the map pool, but my god...they replace it with this?
Of course they had to add some flavor to the map, so lets throw rocks at the 3rd! Wait...rocks aren't good enough? Then how about a ramp leading up to a ledge behind its mineral line! Ya!
Did they learn nothing from Lost Temple!?!!?
This whining about the cliff behind the third is really annoying and why mapmaking wouldn't get anywhere if community had like a veto for maps. Compared to Lost Temple it's at the third and you can simply walk up there so as far as I can see it's no problem, just a nice little feature that adds some potential variety.
On June 08 2012 23:01 blade55555 wrote: That new map is awful, rofl blizzard and their destructible rocks. That is immediately going on my veto list.
I don/t think you understand, ZvP is imbalanced everywhere but Korea supposedly. So toss will get their natural and zergs will have to wait before a third.
Im glad they are focusing on tournament style maps again
Oke, that new 1v1 map has potential, but the 'one choke-3base' + 'rocks at third' got to go. Either one of them, or preferably both.
Now, in zvp, protoss FFE. Zerg can not take a third, unless delayed or inefficient mining (next to the rocks) or sacrificing a lot of drones. That is not that big of a problem in itself, however: protoss can either two base all in (with the delayed third/more zerglings/inefficient mining) this is a problem for zerg to hold. On the other hand, protoss can just take a third and if they some what manage to deny scouting, zerg has to prepare. By the time protoss has their third, zerg is way behind.
Something has got to go.
Or am I too negative on that map?
Zvt can be reasonable, although a tank contain at the choke can be very devestating/annoying.
On June 08 2012 23:01 blade55555 wrote: That new map is awful, rofl blizzard and their destructible rocks. That is immediately going on my veto list.
I don/t think you understand, ZvP is imbalanced everywhere but Korea supposedly. So toss will get their natural and zergs will have to wait before a third.
Im glad they are focusing on tournament style maps again
Pretty sure blade55555 understands the game a touch better than you do
Anyway i don't get this fucking obsession for rocks, seriously. It's like the sentence "oh he's fast expanding, we are going for a macro game for sure!" is any meaningful these days.
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Excellent question. I like looking at a map that doesn't feel so dull or even depressing. A Beach type map is so underused it's silly.
I'm glad Metalo and Korhal are gone though.
Underused? Ohana is on ladder and all tournaments and Bel'Shir Beach has been in many tournaments as well. Definitely not underused. 2 maps with the same style being used in many tournaments/ladder at this point is above average~
Belshir was in GSL and some various tourneys, but it got quickly replaced with the winter version, and Ohana was rather "new" considering it was only implemented on ladder last season. 2 is hardly much, sure there may be other tilesets are seen far less (Volcanic), but a beach type setting is still in the minority.
Arguing past this point is worthless, people's opinions on aesthetics or in this case a map tileset is just that - their own opinion. I would like more maps using varied tilesets that aren't city or night time based, or even your run of the mill generic. I would like to see more volcanic, beach, and desert maps.
Super awesome!!! Have Korhal and Metalopolis vetoed so this is perfect! The new map looks really good, easy accessible expansions and cool symmetry. Never liked rocks on third on any map blizzard has made, if they would remove them it whould be a much better map.
Metalopolis being removed is so great, because now one of my vetos is freed up (along with the korhal veto being freed up). I can't say nobody was expecting it though with all the hate it received from terran and protoss players.
The new blizzard map looks interesting but it is a shame they stick with the terrible formula of 3rd base having rocks and the 4th being a pain to ever take. The little ledge over the 3rd base looks interesting though and I think that is a good idea. I can imagine tank drops being brutal though but we will have to see.
Ah man I was so fucking happy when they stopped making maps and now they started again? Really blizz. I figured the guy's kid who gets to maps for them was happy enough with being able to design a hole freaking map pool of terrible maps for hots.
Ah well meta/korhal give me 2 new vets so I know where one of them will go. Also for fucks sake make antiga cross only/no gold and remove close by ground spawns on entombed. Also why the fuck do ladder maps still not have neutral depots?
yay for more 2v2 maps I mean we've only had the same 2v2 map pool for 4 seasons.
Pitty they only chose to remove 2 maps instead of 8 but can't have everything I guess, pretty sure Desolate Stronghold will be the standard 2v2 1/2base like all the other awful 2v2 maps. Maybe one day blizzard will give us nice big macro 2v2 maps.
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Excellent question. I like looking at a map that doesn't feel so dull or even depressing. A Beach type map is so underused it's silly.
I'm glad Metalo and Korhal are gone though.
Underused? Ohana is on ladder and all tournaments and Bel'Shir Beach has been in many tournaments as well. Definitely not underused. 2 maps with the same style being used in many tournaments/ladder at this point is above average~
Belshir was in GSL and some various tourneys, but it got quickly replaced with the winter version, and Ohana was rather "new" considering it was only implemented on ladder last season. 2 is hardly much, sure there may be other tilesets are seen far less (Volcanic), but a beach type setting is still in the minority.
Arguing past this point is worthless, people's opinions on aesthetics or in this case a map tileset is just that - their own opinion. I would like more maps using varied tilesets that aren't city or night time based, or even your run of the mill generic. I would like to see more volcanic, beach, and desert maps.
Well, Desert is definitely fucking underused for no reason whatsoever. You're right about that.
That new map is absolutely terrible. Rocks at 3rd and 1 choke is gonna have the exact same balance issues as Terminus RE. Zerg will struggle a lot there.
Rocks on the third ? Enjoy my zerg veto Corhal was not that bad imo, but whatever I'll not miss it. Metalopolis was good map, but last season I played mostly ZvZ on it cus it's always banned by P and T, so I will not miss metalopolis as well.
On June 08 2012 23:11 Micket wrote: That new map is absolutely terrible. Rocks at 3rd and 1 choke is gonna have the exact same balance issues as Terminus RE. Zerg will struggle a lot there.
In the specific case for Terminus, if i don't recall wrong the version without the rocks at the third was insanely favoured for z, while the one with the rocks was awful. Food for thought when making macro maps.
Why can't they make a 2v2 map where you can realistically take and hold more than 2 bases? You don't even get a natural for each player on some of the maps.
The ridge behind the 3rd is asking for trouble. Sooooo easy to drop stuff there (especially tanks), positioning your army is going to be a nightmare. 3rd blocked by rocks too, sounds like Blizzard hasn't figured out ZvP yet.
The 2v2 maps are a nightmare. No viable third on any of them (circle syndrome hello), maps seem like proxy heaven.
On June 08 2012 23:14 AdrianHealey wrote: As a zerg, I obviously didn't veto'd metalapolis. I didn't vote korhal either; I had some way of dealing with the siege tanks.
But this new map will get a veto. So should I unveto Shakuras, Tal Darim or Entombed?
Molten looks pretty decent - good addition / replacement for 2v2. Desolate - i see much tank pushes here - looks like on can shell one main right from the bottom or at least do some devastating drops with tank support - also 2nd nat far away, ugly texture work and ofc no viable 3rds (as usual on blizz 2v2 maps ~).
/e so many zergs crying now, i don't understand why. it's not like Lost Temple where you can't get up the ledge. here you can... let's just say: new metagame ;D!
i love that blizzard are doing their 1v1 maps off tournaments now. so fucking good of them to finally be doing this. i wonder how this new map is gonna play out. gonna go test it soon ^_^V
Condemned ridge looks pretty sketchy. Destructable rocks at the third is going to make ZvP a nightmare, and a 4th base is going to be extremely difficult to take.
Condemned Ridge looks suspiciously similar to Nerazim Crypt (I think it was) from a few seasons back, and those ridges at the back of the third look like drop heaven :|
A little bit disapointed that they took out Korhal Compound. Had great success with it this season as a Zerg player. I currently have Shakuras Plateau, Entombed Valley and Antiga Shipyard downvoted and I am not really sure I want to try those out again.
Maybe the new map won't be as bad as it seems... we'll see about that.
Korhal is a good map overall and I hate to see it removed. It has a good design idea - go through the open middle and be spotted or take the longer but narrower side paths.Probably the only issue I had with it was siege tanks at 5ths deny 4ths but it wasnt that big.
The new map is disgusting. Everybody is against rocks on 3rd but you still place them -_- The hill upramp behind 3rds is a feature favoring only terrans. Map middle is non existent - every path can is no bigger than the size of 4 force fields.
On June 08 2012 23:31 Giantt wrote: Korhal is a good map overall and I hate to see it removed. It has a good design idea - go through the open middle and be spotted or take the longer but narrower side paths.Probably the only issue I had with it was siege tanks at 5ths deny 4ths but it wasnt that big.
The new map is disgusting. Everybody is against rocks on 3rd but you still place them -_- The hill upramp behind 3rds is a feature favoring only terrans. Map middle is non existent - every path can is no bigger than the size of 4 force fields.
well the hill will benefit toss too, warp prism + sentries blocking the ramp, delay some mining but it's a 3RD BASE, come on you should have units by then.
rocks should balance out zergs dominating, I'm all for the swarm but I want a balanced game, they gave us queens and now give us rocks to control our macro, seems fine to me.
no middle part of the map? well maybe we'll have to split our armies and do some ACTUAL FLANKING.
this map doesn't look that bad, it might actually force players to split their armies because of the narrow paths.
Cool new map, nice to see Metalopolis finally getting the boot - it lived a good life. Also nice to see Korhal getting the removal too, fuck that map was hard to hold a third on.
I like the look of the new map, except for the rocks ofcourse, as if the third isn't hard enough to take and hold with that wide open area and the ledge
After so long you'll think Blizzard would have learned that rocks at the 3rd are never good and would just lead to all zergs downvoting it.
Edit: I didn't even notice the cliff behind the 3rd. This is just hilariously bad now. Just get rid of your mapmaking team Blizzard and adopt the tournament maps used by the proscene.
I don't mind it much. I had metalopolis vetoed for quite some time now and Korhal didn't seem too popular. One thing I wonder about is the high ground behind the third on Condemned Ridge. I mean... I don't mind it much as protoss but that zerg third is gonna have a hard time for sure. Imagine a siege tank up there, reminds me of Lost Temple...
On June 08 2012 23:46 Catatonic wrote: Never saw anything wrong with Metalopolis it was one of my favorite maps maybe they'll bring it back AGAIN :D one can hope :/
Surprised that Tal Darim still lives on and that Blizzard seems comfortable adding another one of their own maps, but at least they are accepting critique on their new map it seems. Still good though, Korhal was poopy and Metal seems like it is the alpha/omega of all maps.
As a zerg I think fellow zergs should take another look at that new map. On further inspection look at that third in comparison to your natural dat choke. I think the slowing of your third might be ok because you only have one front to defend from pushes specially from protoss. Just be sure to cover ramp in back with overlords and be sure to not get cannoned. Also the area in the back looks sick for muta play so take a second look its like a easy to defend taldarim.
Sigh, another crappy map by blizzard. Zerg will lose every zvp on that map because of those retarded rocks on the third. I mean, they don't even give an alternative third, anywhere else zerg could use for their third would get destroyed.
Is Condemned Ridge up anywhere? Don't see it on NA or the Beta servers.
And yea, Condemned Ridge looks a little too Protoss friendly (this coming from a Protoss player). If that choke point is small enough, I think you might even be able to just FFE from the natural ramp to the third's choke, while having a cannon kill the rocks.
wow when i saw the 2nd picture i was scared for a second xD didn't read that it was a 2v2 map that would have been the worst Z map that ever existed ...
good thing korhal is out so i get one of my vetos back YES
on the other hand i'm not sure what to think about the new map... at least the mappool gets smaller so maybe if i don't have to veto it i can finally play only on maps where i don't have a disadvantage against at least 1 race
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
And why no Metropolis? Why didn't the mapmaking "team" just fix the Metropolis issues instead of creating this collection of wasted bits and bytes?
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season.
Is there a typo here? How can Metropolis be an improved version of Metalopolis?
On June 08 2012 23:52 Kiyo. wrote: Is Condemned Ridge up anywhere? Don't see it on NA or the Beta servers.
And yea, Condemned Ridge looks a little too Protoss friendly (this coming from a Protoss player). If that choke point is small enough, I think you might even be able to just FFE from the natural ramp to the third's choke, while having a cannon kill the rocks.
Yeh looking at the picture, the choke at the 3rd if anything seems smaller than the ramp at the natural so just FFE at the 3rd seems crazily easy. Maybe theres some blocker to stop it, otherwise Im going to enjoy FFE into 3 base collosus timings
Haha, that new map is the metropolis I've been waiting for! Glad to see a nice protoss map in the pool for once. At least it appears that way, hopefully it plays out the same way.
my first hatch on condemned will go down to protect the third and natural *-*. Defense position taken until drop is done for the opponent. Just gonna do it for the bw feeling of taking defense positions with hatches. Nice playing around with the 3 bases by Blizzard, otherwise pretty standard this map. Lategame will be funny, as you can plonk down a PF and defend 3 bases at once with it. Terran income is save !
that 1v1 map is the worst looking map i've seen in recent months - rocks on 3rd, only 1 entrance to natural + 3d (that's why there are rocks but still ...) and what the hell is that thing behind the minerals on the 3rd - marine tank and the base is dead.
...Rocks at the third. What the fuck game are these Blizzard mapmakers playing.
Did they even mention whether horizontal spawns are enabled or not? If they are, then christ, that has to be the worst "macro suitable" map they've ever released. It's like they've never even seen a game go past the five minute mark.
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
You mean turtle till your near max and win? So much fun right I bet u heart emtombed too.
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
And why no Metropolis? Why didn't the mapmaking "team" just fix the Metropolis issues instead of creating this collection of wasted bits and bytes?
It is not like Z needs any special help by the map pool nowadays. And it's not that bad if you compare it to the early days of horrible maps for Z.
Im glad they have rocks at the 3rd actually. The game was getting so easy on just getting a super fast 3rd. If its cross pos only (which it probably wont be) then the map could be good
I really like this new map and think it will shake up the meta game a little bit. Lots of air space means stargate, banshee, and muta play look to be very viable on this map. Also drops seem to be very good in general on this map. I can see infestor, storm, nydus worm, and tank drops being very good at the third base as the game goes on. Also unlike lost temple the high ground drops happen at the third and you have a way to get at the high ground without air units. While the fourth seems hard to defend it does appear it has XNT right by it so that should give you quite a bit of map awareness. Seems a little tight in the mid though and I am not sure about the sight blockers in the open areas. Makes controlling the watch tower important if you want to fight across the sight blocker. At least the paths around the sight blockers are better than on Shakuras. Finally despite people not liking or being bored with Shakuras or TDA they are well balanced maps imo ,so, I'm happy blizzard kept them.
HI, I AM BLIZZARD AND I PUT ROCKS IN EVERY FUCKING MAP THAT I MAKE TO BLOCK THE 3RD, ALSO I MAKE 7 ENTRANCES TO EVERY BASE, AND SHAKURAS IS A VERY GUD MAP THAT WILL NEVER BE GONE, SAME FOR TALDARIM
Rocks at the 3rd again? I dunno we will see if this does anything about the issues in TvZ where zergs are pretty much free to do what they want, but this could mess up things with PvZ where Stargate play may be too strong......or this new 8 gate-robo all him that has been killing a lot of Zergs.
While it is nice to see another macro map with a natural 3rd, the blizzard mapmaking team fails in my eyes. They either churn out the same/ slightly different maps and stagnate heavily when it comes to the ridiculous constrains they put there to 'help less experienced players', which by itself is ridiculous. It has been said many times, but brood war had an amazing array of straight up macro maps, smaller timing-oriented maps and absolutely crazy and interesting maps utilizing extremely creative usage of the editor. While the 3rd party mapmakers such as the GOM maps and ESV are doing a way better job at map layouts I still think way more could be done and Blizzard seems to have forced even them to conform to their ridiculous model for certain aspects. What really excites me about KeSPA coming is the possibility of them bringing their magic and joining in as one of the 3 primary mapmaking sources, leaving Blizzard to focus on other stuff.
On June 09 2012 00:11 OrbitalPlane wrote: meta out is great. I hoped for some more changes so. Taldarim, shakuras and maybe even antiga could have been removed imho.
these are my 3 vetos, but i guess i will need to change it since blizzard puts fucking rocks in every single map they make
We’ve received feedback from our higher levels players that rotationally symmetric macro maps can be difficult to deal with for certain races when they spawn at certain points.
Interesting wonder who are those higher level players
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
You mean turtle till your near max and win? So much fun right I bet u heart emtombed too.
If anything, defending 3base Roach is far more turtley than playing standard. I don't really like Entombed because the main is so small and close positions is lame. Maybe Zergs will have to innovate beyond 1 build against Toss, though, which is nice.
Condemned ridge aka condemned to be very happy to be a Protoss vs Zerg on this map. The rocks may be agonizing, but + Show Spoiler +
FOR ONCE THERES NO FREAKING BACKDOOR TO YOUR THIRD
Zerg will also be able to mass a wall of spines to cover his third/natural as well. Gonna have to see how it plays out.
The high ground behind the third will be EXTREMELY annoying vs terran though. It'll be like siege tank drops on lost temple all over again. The way the third is aligned makes this a pretty amazing map for mech. It'll definitely suck to both spawn either top or bottom vs a terran with how well siege tanks will be able to push along the 4th for contention of the watch tower.
Map definitely invokes some thought. Sucks to be a Zerg on it, though.
WTF is this shit map .... it seems like blizzard isnt listening at all .... just look up for what noone wants and make exactely that what a waste of a downvote
On June 09 2012 00:27 JiYan wrote: quite pleased with the map changes, but those two 2v2 maps are kind of awful o_o
Desolate Strongholds looks like a pos remake of discord but Molten Crater is actually amazing. You can easily wall-in between your bases AND you have a high ground to defend it from being poked at by stalkers/marines/marauders/roaches. One more map for TZ teams to veto, anyways.
It'll actually just be impossible to attack into that choke without siege tank/vision/a significant army advantage. But it's one more breath of fresh air after dealing with maps that punish you for expanding by making it impossible to defend.
Oh blizz. With exception of Shakuras and Antiga all the maps you ever made have been bad. This one looks like it definetly won't join these two in the ''somewhat succesful maps you made''. So please stop making maps and hire the pro mapmakers. Also the ''stealing'' maps form mapmakers is pretty s****y I mean how many new ppl even know Taldarim isnt map you made? All you do is just take map, f**k it over, put LE behind it and claim you made it. Completly remake ur approach to making and implementing new maps.
New map is 3 base and go, no race has a hope of holding a 4th base on it. Add in the destructible rocks and the map is most likely going to end up a Protoss paradise, with Terran players also enjoying a substantial advantage over Zerg (similar to Antiga and Ohana in terms of a fourth being required but near impossible for a Zerg to hold).
I believe the map pool should be varied and this means that it will have maps which favour different races, this is absolutely fine in a decent sized map pool, as long as there is some sort of balance to the amount of maps which favour specific races, or specific styles of play.
We should also be moving away from luck based maps (random spawns and rotational bias) and further towards maps with predictable spawns and intelligent layouts. We want skill to thrive and to reduce the amount of luck as much as possible.
Maps like Entombed on the ladder have a massive fluctuation in how good or bad they are for certain races. Spawn close top and you're in a world of hurt in certain match ups, spawn cross and the entire thing changes, a complete lottery. Tal Darim is much the same, a lottery based on where you spawn in relation to your opponent. Random spawns also mean you're less likely to scout ridiculous cheese quick enough, which further increases the luck factor. Not to mention the fact that random spawn maps are massively beneficial to map hackers, a problem which is only going to grow on the ladder.
So much hatred for Metalopolis when Shakuras is still in the map pool.
Also not sure why the larger map pool ended up being a bad thing, I liked the added variety. Now we'll be back to everyone playing 5 maps after vetoing and since each race will hate slightly different maps, you'll probably end up only ever seeing 3 or 4 different maps on the ladder.
I see your ledge that can be bunkered off and have siegetanks shooting down your third, and I react by downvoting this map!
Good thing they took out Korhal Compound, a map that I actually really enjoyed in all the matchups, and replaced it with the marriage between shakuras and tal darim that will definitely favour a turtling terran or Protoss.
Guys, what about spreading creep and overlords on that ledge if you're Zerg? Making a Sensor Tower (so underused) if you re Terran? Placing pylons or obs if you re Protoss?
It will be a pain to defend if the enemy lands, but with those things i mentioned above you should be safe. I think it's weird and weird is interesting. I want more crazy maps instead of the typical cookie cutter ones.
On June 08 2012 23:51 CajunMan wrote: As a zerg I think fellow zergs should take another look at that new map. On further inspection look at that third in comparison to your natural dat choke. I think the slowing of your third might be ok because you only have one front to defend from pushes specially from protoss. Just be sure to cover ramp in back with overlords and be sure to not get cannoned. Also the area in the back looks sick for muta play so take a second look its like a easy to defend taldarim.
The chokepoint will probably be much better for protoss and terran who are much more comfortable simply turtling on three bases. Like entombed valley, you won't be able to pressure the protoss third at all as zerg. Defending in a chokepoint against protoss isn't an advantage at all either. Entombed turned out to be a pretty decent map overall though, so we'll see, but I remain sceptical.
The ridge seems a bit gimmicky and medivac drops could potentially be pretty broken especially against zerg,
* All 4 spawns are approximately equidistant, less the cross spawns by ground. (both green measuring lines are the same size, just one is bent around the obstacle).
* Each spawn position has at least 4 accessible (fairly defensible) bases, cross has 5.
* Split Map base count would be around 8 bases per side prior to mine out.
* Xel'Naga Towers will give spotting from high ground to either side of low ground shrubs.
Opinions & Potential Issues (emphasis on potential)
* Xel'Naga Towers: may be to strong defensively in late game situations regardless of race. Ranged units like Tanks, Broods, and Colossus.
Why: Due to the shrubs with XNT control defensively the units mentioned could fire on attacking forces without being attack able. Predominantly could be an issue in TvT in Tank vs. Tank positional battles, where attacking directly could become near suicidal without a LOT of scans available for the attacker, and none needed for the defender.
* Red Zoned Box (no arrows): Seems odd, in the 2-->4 or 1-->3 Spawn positions this area likely could (needs tested) be used to medivac leap frog tanks to assault the opponents third in TvZ and TvT.
Why: This makes these positions a bit messed up for 'tournament play', likely leading to forced cross to make the map 'usable'. Same issue 'could' exist from the opponents third to the the opponents natural, but that may be more of a stretch. Overall this seems like a needless addition to this map or it may have been fine in these positions were that high ground plateau simply more air space.
*Red Zoned Box (with arrows): This position seems to far to easy to defend a 4 to 5 base structure regardless of who is in the defensive position.
Why: The defender has far to short of a distance to move to defend 5 bases with XNT control and decent attack spotting on their side, vs. the attacker. Defenders advantage in distance is good for 2 base or potentially 3 base looks, it's however bad for 4th and 5th bases. It's more common that defending a 4th or 5th base on some of the best maps in play, leave some other base more open to attack. These issues lead to turtle styles of play likely being the norm in 'macro' games on this map, which would be pretty boring for spectators and potentially players.
On June 09 2012 00:50 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote: Out goes two maps I veto, in goes one map I'll veto.
Same for me. I really don't see how the new map will be relevant in any tournament setting. I really can't. Also, it's ok if the third base is rather hard to hold, but also including rocks is excessive. I never understood the concept behind putting rocks on close expos. Is it to limit the options of the player? To artificially shorten the game time? Why is taking expansions being made harder when 3+ base macro games are the more interesting ones?
Anyway, i'll veto this and that's it. I'm looking forward to KESPA maps honestly. Nobody will give a shit about these maps anyways.
At least someone who tries to analyze the map and give feedback as Blizzard is suggesting in the post. I recommend you also post that in the battle.net forum
Let's wait. We cried at every map blizzard made, but some of them turn out to be great. ( Antiga, Entombed, Shakuras ) Every map after a long period of time get firgured out and start to be bad ( shakuras and half map scenario, antiga showing terran favored sign, etc ) But in the end, all map have these problems.
The 2v2 map pool changes seem to be terrible to me. Molten Crater has a rush distance like Steppes of War, and you simply can't expand on the other new map... Seriously, wtf Blizzard? There are such good 2v2 maps made by community mapmakers out there, why can't you come up with any good maps?
stop crying about rocks - they're there so you have to make some units before taking a third. boo hoo. since you can beat hellions with queens now terran has next to no real t1 pressure options.
the fourth is very takeable. i dont see why people complain.
I wish they would stop blocking expansions with rocks; I don't mind blocking paths but man. If they want to keep them they should atleast remove all the armor from the rocks -.-.
On the new 1v1 map why are there random cliffs behind the third??? lol hasn't blizzard already learned from Taldarim and Shattered Temple that cliffs like that don't really bring anything but mass terran drops which are annoying as hell to stop? I mean atleast theres a ramp up to the cliffs, but I seriously still can't imagine running a herd of lings up there to stop a massive drop of tanks and marines, since the ramp provides a nice little choke for the tanks to fire away at T.T. I hope the get rid of the cliffs -.-. I mean also, the map seams relatively simple for a terran to split down the middle already with the walls making some pretty narrow chokes mid, so why the cliffs in the back of the thirds -.-
They just need to get rid of the rocks at the 3rd and perhaps make the cliff unpathable (sort of like in Cloud Kingdom). If they do that, I think it'll be an interesting map. We don't really have mirrored-symmetry maps which have no spawns disabled and it would be great if this map actually got in with those tweaks.
The sad reality is rocks are probably a good idea for a Map in the current Metagame of TvZ since its impossible to force units yourself these days at least let the Map do it.
The fuuuuuck. Im not seeing tournoments with tal darim or shakuras in them! Also the 3d base in the new map has to be blocked by fucking rocks, my god blizzard. Why does every map suck these days. Every map maker just says, well in a 2v2 this player gets these 4 free bases and then we just mirror everything, also rocks at the 3d for no reason, also half bases are not allowed, so arent gaseless bases.
Most badly is that every map has small center space, its made up of choke points. Also I feel like the only reason shakuras and tal darim are still in here is cuz blizzard is to lazy ot make new maps.
So I think this finally proves that the people who make the ladder map pool are actually retarded. They must actually have some sort of mental disability to constantly make terrible decisions when it comes to map making and map pool making.
Why rocks on the 3rd? Why no neutral depots? Why TDA still!?
I wonder why Blizzard doesn't more actively keep only certain spawns active, it's the reason I still veto Antiga even though I'd love to play on it if it were cross-only.
ESV map making philosophy is that cross-only is a crutch that encourages poor design. It also encourages players to be lazy/greedy with scouting (or lack thereof). I think this line of thought is what Blizzard map team also looks at. Cross-only also enables the use of specific proxy cheese too, which maybe in certain long bo5+ tournament series would be okay, but it would be pretty annoying on the ladder.
However, I think half bases would be a good way to re-integrate the concept of gold bases, or maybe scattered gold patches at a half base. The original concept of half bases from the GSL mapmakers (as seen on GSL version of daybreak and also GSL version of Atlantis Spacebear) is that you're deciding if you want resources or positioning. I'd like to see this concept further explored rather than always defaulting to destructible rocks. I prefer seeing destructible rocks used across the map on choke areas the way they are in Metropolis and Cloud Kingdom, rather than a forced delay on 3rd bases.
Third rocks and they can't make it truly symmetrical like fighting spirit? Nope, will probably never play and please god don't let it be used in tournaments.
Just some food for thougts, if every map was made so that there's an easy third to take, wouldn't we just be okay with a single map. If every map had same characteristic, every match would play out the same way.
Zergs always like to bitch about, and liken entombed and Terminus to this new map. They dogg on maps with rocks at the third all the time, like Tal Darim. Saying how imbalanced they are. Well, news flash, people. These maps are balanced statistically.
Can't find Terminus with the rocks, but check out that stats for without the rocks... lol 75% in zerg favor No wonder you Zergs don't like the rocks. You like winning every game, kinda like on metal.
Also, this highground that has easy access with ramp... No terran is going to risk a siege there. Way too much investment that can be stopped by one scouting ling.
Typical whining that comes with every map update. Back your opinions on rocks at the third up with some facts if you're going to spout that nonsense.
I don't really get the reasoning for including a cliff at the third like that. Is it just like, "eeeeehhhhh, let's see what kinda shit goes down if we put this here...."?
As a Zerg player that third base is gonna be a nightmare.
It's heavily delayed vs ffe it appears any kind of ranged harass (Medivac marine drop) Should be more than enough to butcher your econ and will have a much easier time getting away.
One small choke to defend three bases is annoying too, since you won't be able to put any pressure on your opponent until they might wish to take a fourth. The chokes to the third and natural base seem rather small too, making protoss pushes and forcefields much better and more annoying.
So sad to see Entombed Valley still being in the map pool, but I guess it was expected seeing as tournaments haven't realised that it's one of top 5 worst maps ever (and that's saying alot) and makes for some really boring to watch games or it ends quickly since bunker rushes and toss pushes are much stronger on it.
I wonder why Blizzard doesn't more actively keep only certain spawns active, it's the reason I still veto Antiga even though I'd love to play on it if it were cross-only.
ESV map making philosophy is that cross-only is a crutch that encourages poor design. It also encourages players to be lazy/greedy with scouting (or lack thereof). I think this line of thought is what Blizzard map team also looks at. Cross-only also enables the use of specific proxy cheese too, which maybe in certain long bo5+ tournament series would be okay, but it would be pretty annoying on the ladder.
However, I think half bases would be a good way to re-integrate the concept of gold bases, or maybe scattered gold patches at a half base. The original concept of half bases from the GSL mapmakers (as seen on GSL version of daybreak and also GSL version of Atlantis Spacebear) is that you're deciding if you want resources or positioning. I'd like to see this concept further explored rather than always defaulting to destructible rocks. I prefer seeing destructible rocks used across the map on choke areas the way they are in Metropolis and Cloud Kingdom, rather than a forced delay on 3rd bases.
I think their problem with half bases really is lazyness on their side. Simply put they won't want to bother balacing around them.
Imagen this: Stats say that terrans on 2,5 bases are UP. What are you going to do? Buff them so they are broken with 3 bases? They won't have to bother with that so they simply don't put half bases in their maps.
On June 09 2012 01:27 GinDo wrote: Rocks on Third?+ Show Spoiler +
Vetoed
I don't get the whole rocks on third?!? Do they want us to all in on 2bases? Why don't we bring back Oasis, Delta, and Steppes while were at it.
No they want us to build units before getting a third base ... ( at least i hope so even though the Queen change seems to indicate something different ... )
Wait, Entombed Valley is still in the map pool? No change in spawn positions, at least?
Would have been happy if they just took Metalopolis and Korhal out and added in Metropolis, if at least this map had either no rocks at the third, or not that stupid cliff behind the third T_T
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Bel'Shir Beach is the worst tileset ever. Literally in any RTS game I have ever seen.
If I was fighting in an epic intergalactic battle, I wouldn't even show up if someone told me I had to fight for glory on a bloody summertime vacation spot. It looks pathetic.
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Bel'Shir Beach is the worst tileset ever. Literally in any RTS game I have ever seen.
If I was fighting in an epic intergalactic battle, I wouldn't even show up if someone told me I had to fight for glory on a bloody summertime vacation spot. It looks pathetic.
Couldn't disagree more. Love the beach tileset, it is beautiful. I hope we continue to see it (but it doesn't seem to be catching on..)
I actually don't think the ridge is that much of a problem, most units (except tanks probably) won't be able to reach about 1/2 of the minerals and the hatch. Also, you can just run up there.
Waiting for a terran to tank drop with 3 scv's to wall off that ramp and siege though :D
This is the first time I have cared more about 2v2 maps than 1v1, and probably the last time, but WHY THE FUCK would you remove High Orbit that map is so delicious.
Rocks at the third rocks at the third rocks at the third god damn it Blizzard just when I started playing Z again rocks at the third. I guess I'm just going to all in every time protoss FFE's then.
On June 09 2012 01:45 StatikKhaos wrote: Haha, i love the detail for the 1v1 map description and for the 2v2 map description its like, yeah eh its a map
although I only play 2s when I'm taking a break or playing with a friend in a lower league, the 2v2 maps look absolutely horrendous.
Also: Destructible Rocks..... why.... I'm okay with rocks blocking the shorter route from nat to third, but why does it have to be on top of the third, think about us zergies. Other than the rotational symmetry which screwed zerg over the main reason for vetoing tal'darim so far was the rocks... oh and the no ramp thing for zvz (and pvp I imagine for the protoss out there)... It's a shame too because lategame on tal'darim was amazing.
I'm happy that Metalopolis is gone too. That frees up a veto. I just wish they would remove Tal'Darim and add a more current tournament map. Otherwise I can't complain. I like the current map pool.
On June 09 2012 01:45 StatikKhaos wrote: Haha, i love the detail for the 1v1 map description and for the 2v2 map description its like, yeah eh its a map
although I only play 2s when I'm taking a break or playing with a friend in a lower league, the 2v2 maps look absolutely horrendous.
Same, only play with a low league friend, but still, the lack of map rotation has been frustrating. And now they remove the only genuinely good map and replace Discord IV with a map that looks very similiar in function. Shared starting base with one natural, two golds in the middle with towers, a couple of outlying expos that have to be accessed through the middle of the map. On the plus side I actually like the look of the first new 2v2 map, with the shared natural with cliffs overlooking the entrance.
On June 09 2012 01:48 The KY wrote: This is the first time I have cared more about 2v2 maps than 1v1, and probably the last time, but WHY THE FUCK would you remove High Orbit that map is so delicious.
I'm happy they removed that map. I'm very happy that now there exists two maps that you can viably expand on without having to worry about the worse-than-steppes-of-war rush distance from enemy nat to your main, nor do you have to worry about rocks in the back of your main (high orbit). I like the direction they are heading with the 2v2 maps. With the old ones, it was almost a garetee that if you expand and they rushed, there was no chance of holding.
So people understand how bad 2v2 maps are, there are 2 maps that have an accessable natural (one that has a choke to guard and is not completely open). On one of those maps, there are still rocks into your main, and depending on spawn location, the enemy can have a 15s distance from their natural to be sieging your main. The other map has only 1 expand that you can take, and depending on spawn location has 5s air rush distance, and potentially 15s rush distance from main to main. On every other map, if you try to expand and they rushed, you have basically lost. These two new maps hold so much promise for allowing for expand builds in 2v2 games.
New 1v1 map looks like typical blizzard map. Except for 2 base all-in its now 3. Why do map makers always do that in 4 spawn maps? They plan out the first 3 expansions, mirror it and then throw in 4 more to make it 'balanced'. I want to see a 4 spawn map where every expansion for every spawn is thought out.
On June 09 2012 02:02 iTzSnypah wrote: New 1v1 map looks like typical blizzard map. Except for 2 base all-in its now 3. Why do map makers always do that in 4 spawn maps? They plan out the first 3 expansions, mirror it and then throw in 4 more to make it 'balanced'. I want to see a 4 spawn map where every expansion for every spawn is thought out.
Blizz really seems convinced that a balanced map has to have rocks on the 3rd - to be honest, this has gotten to a point where I find this quite amusing
On Jun 8 2012 13:02> (12 min) iTzSnypah wrote: New 1v1 map looks like typical blizzard map. Except for 2 base all-in its now 3. Why do map makers always do that in 4 spawn maps? They plan out the first 3 expansions, mirror it and then throw in 4 more to make it 'balanced'. I want to see a 4 spawn map where every expansion for every spawn is thought out.
Rocks at third are for balance in pvz. Zerg should not be allowed to get so fast third base. Map looks realy nice but like that high ground at 3. Not like that high ground!
On June 09 2012 02:17 DrPhilOfdOOm wrote: Why do they make rocks at third? so stupied. Blizzard keep to what you are good at... NOT making maps
hmmmmm MAYBE...it is to discourage making nothing but drones to 60 while hiding behind ur great wall of evo chamber + spine + queens? unless the enemy all-ins?
That new map needs a lot of work. Rocks at the third is absolutely absurd. Fast 3 bases is standard ZvP against a fast expanding Protoss which is also standard. Should be cross spawn only. Fine with Metalopolis gone, but Korhol was fine minus the fact that they wouldn't make the smallest effort to fix the fact that tanks can siege the 3rd from high ground. Simple fix, but apparently too hard for Blizzard to manage. Not gonna complain too much about it being gone. It was decent, but nothing to cry over.
On June 09 2012 02:16 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: Rocks at third are for balance in pvz. Zerg should not be allowed to get so fast third base. Map looks realy nice but like that high ground at 3. Not like that high ground!
If Zerg can't get a fast 3 bases against a 2 base all-in, we lose.
As someone who plays a lot of 2v2 I love that they took those two maps out. And I think Molton Crater looks like a great map. Although maybe a bit too easy to cannon rush (espcially the base without the gold adjacent to it).
I am not so sure about the other 2v2 map. the player's main base is in the shape of a nut bag.
zerg is extremely strong right now, stop complaining about a map that might not favor you when your race is doing really well, if this map didnt have rocks on it it would be unplayable
On June 09 2012 01:45 StatikKhaos wrote: Haha, i love the detail for the 1v1 map description and for the 2v2 map description its like, yeah eh its a map
although I only play 2s when I'm taking a break or playing with a friend in a lower league, the 2v2 maps look absolutely horrendous.
Same, only play with a low league friend, but still, the lack of map rotation has been frustrating. And now they remove the only genuinely good map and replace Discord IV with a map that looks very similiar in function. Shared starting base with one natural, two golds in the middle with towers, a couple of outlying expos that have to be accessed through the middle of the map. On the plus side I actually like the look of the first new 2v2 map, with the shared natural with cliffs overlooking the entrance.
The 2v2 map pool is quite horrible, but the ones that they chose to remove were the worst imo. On Discord if you positioned your army in the middle it was impossible for the enemy to reach your half of the map on foot without attacking head on. One immobile army could guard 7 bases from a ground attack.
Why can't Blizz simply make a poll at the end of every season and ask us what maps we would like to see added/removed? And why don't they rely on community maps solely? I actually don't understand it.
To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
Then I'd do a different build order. "Standard" is not the "Only" way to play.
On June 09 2012 00:04 vandelayindustries wrote: Is there any reason the 3v3 and 4v4 map pools haven't been changed since season 3? They're far from perfect...
I see so many people complain of rocks on the third base.
Maybe Blizzard doesn't want zerg to have 3 bases by the 5 min mark? Or maybe they are ok with that, but your third needs to be vulnerable?
Lets all QQ cause were zerg and want to be able to take 3 bases and max super quick. God forbid you have to play on different maps with different styles and different weakness/strengths.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
Then I'd do a different build order. "Standard" is not the "Only" way to play.
What this guy said. Id do a 1 gate expand
Simple enough. Why must there only be 1 opening that is viable? Zergs have just gotten way to used to 3 free bases. Take your 3rd in a vulnerable spot. Taking a 3rd that quick should put you at some kind of disadvantage.
On June 09 2012 03:00 ohampatu wrote: Lets all QQ cause were zerg and want to be able to take 3 bases and max super quick. God forbid you have to play on different maps with different styles and different weakness/strengths.
This.
One build order *should not* work on all maps. Otherwise we might as well play on only 1 map.
On June 09 2012 03:00 ohampatu wrote: Lets all QQ cause were zerg and want to be able to take 3 bases and max super quick. God forbid you have to play on different maps with different styles and different weakness/strengths.
This.
One build order *should not* work on all maps. Otherwise we might as well play on only 1 map.
People haven't really been used to using different builds on ladder. In part because to get better faster you should be doing one build every game. Which is fine, in which case they just need to veto the map :/
Blizzard can't you fix zvp without cutting a zergs balls off? Rocks at third, no open areas, map covered with ramps and 1 small choke point covers every toss expo. I can't think of a reason blizz would add this map other then padding the toss winrate (because we all know that when the winrates are 50% sc2s glaring issues will be fixed)
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It's called Metalopolis.
But wait, you say:
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
FFEing is extremely weak on Metalopolis, not because it's impossible, but because it's extremely vulnerable just due to the positioning of the natural and how wide it is. Taking a third as Protoss on that map is almost impossible. This is actually the biggest double standard of a post I've read so far on the topic.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
2 Bases Zerg ( provided he has a macro hatch for production though ) is not as bad as people make it out to be especially against Terran ( if he is on 2 Bases as well ) . Leenock played that style very successful on his run back when he went to the GSL Finals. In fact 3 fully saturated bases against 2 in TvZ puts you miles ahead. A big reason why TvZ is currently kind of broken because you can't prevent the Zerg from getting to that and take big risks to just stay even economy wise while opening yourself to all kinds of all-ins.
On June 09 2012 03:11 AGsc wrote: Rocks -_- but don't complain here, complain on the official BNet thread. They asked for feedback, chances are better they will receive it from there.
On June 09 2012 03:11 AGsc wrote: Rocks -_- but don't complain here, complain on the official BNet thread. They asked for feedback, chances are better they will receive it from there.
Its so funny you zerg players just quote 'rocks' like rocks are an issue.
yea people dont like rocks, but this is no diff from taldarim....you shouldn't get 3 free bases..your third base either needs to be delayed or needs to be in a more vulnerable spot.
why is it so hard for zergs to see this? Blizzard wants your third base to be vulnerable if its that easy. Quite simple. Theres 2 ways to do this, adding destructible rocks, or making the bases super far apart. Read my last 3 posts if you want to argue that 'a 5 min 3rd is normal'.
If you zergs want a tip? how about drop your third next to the rocks, make a round of drones, then a few lings to slowly kill the rocks. Drop your 4th in the 3rd's spot. Isn't that what you guys do it on Taldarim.
So glad that Metalopolis and Discord IV are finally being removed
Isn't KC 2 player, not 4 player?
Also... surely this new 1v1 map doesn't have as much empty space around the sides as it appears? o.O Protecting from drops and air harrass is gonna be a bitch...
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
On June 09 2012 03:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: So glad that Metalopolis and Discord IV are finally being removed
Isn't KC 2 player, not 4 player?
Also... surely this new 1v1 map doesn't have as much empty space around the sides as it appears? o.O Protecting from drops and air harrass is gonna be a bitch...
It does
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Well that sums it up lol. Still, as protoss strong 2 base all in PvZ, PvP wont change much and PvT, templar to defend drops and hopefully with good control we should fine.
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
It's about the map pool not the map, well sort of about the map.
I have been changing the map scene in huge ways since beta, remind me why my opinion should not matter?
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
Who cares if he is high profile or not ......... is his opinion on the matter.
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
It's about the map pool not the map, well sort of about the map.
I have been changing the map scene in huge ways since beta, remind me why my opinion should not matter?
For an insightful person, i dont understand why your questioning it. I gave every reason in my replies. If you want a reason its quite simple: Because you didn't put anything usefull.
Like i just said..A mapmaker/high profile person making a post like that isn't anything. You didn't put a view point. But look at the first zerg who quoted you, he used your '................' to make a balance complaint.
You words hold water, so when you decide to not use them effectively shit gets taken out of hand.
edit: its also the reason somebody else beat me to reporting you, your second post should have been the only post needed, hopefully other zerg players wont quote you like the dude under your post thinking your making a balance complaint. It still amazes me 'community' people dont know how to act in a community
I don't really get the reasoning for Metalopolis getting cut. I was sort of indifferent to that map, so it's not a big deal, but I feel like I see that map in a lot of tournaments.
On June 09 2012 03:25 ThirdDegree wrote: I don't really get the reasoning for Metalopolis getting cut. I was sort of indifferent to that map, so it's not a big deal, but I feel like I see that map in a lot of tournaments.
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Excellent question. I like looking at a map that doesn't feel so dull or even depressing. A Beach type map is so underused it's silly.
I'm glad Metalo and Korhal are gone though.
Remember the interesting and different tile sets with Metropolis. Turns out those causes lag issues, and maybe they are afraid of that again.
As far as i can say, this map Condemned Ridge looks like a PvZ paradise, between the destructible rocks, the one entrance to the third, and the fourth isn't too bad either, I can wall off the back side, and position my army on the side opening towards my base and be completely safe from everything. There's also a ridge behind the third that Terran could abuse with siege tanks, AND there aren't really any wide open spaces for Zerg to engage. Zergs better start vetoing this map the second season 8 starts.
This new map looks really good for Protoss :/ chokes everywhere to make FFs strong, a really easy to defend natural, and a really easy to defend third. TvP is going to be hell on this map for sure, and ZvP is going to be really limited: the mass roach style might not be overly effective with a lack of attack angles.
On June 08 2012 22:48 LemonyTang wrote: Why do mapmakers insist on making maps on such boring tilesets? Where are the Bel'Shir Beach's of the ladder?
Performance issues. They want people with the minimum specs to be able to play all the maps without issue, which means not getting too fancy (especially with water)
On June 09 2012 03:30 raf3776 wrote: I think we need to get away from a super fast 3rd meta. it just turns into a infestor broodlord countdown vs zergs and collosi/ht countdown vs toss.
Do you think a decent compromise would be just a longer distance 3rd w/o rocks?
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
Its funny, cause before I could even hit post a zerg person had quoted him and made a balance complaint.
Then diamond clarifies what he meant, which is completely different than what his post meant. Read my post under the one you quoted for my full example. Also i didn't even beat whoever reported him, so uh, us mortals sometimes know what were talking about?
The new 1v1 map could be decent if the third wasn't so bad.. First off, rocks? Why does blizzard feel the need to hinder fast third builds for zergs? ZvP will be just like Taldarim altar on this map. Which is just silly. Second, an easily abusable ledge above the third? Did they learn anything form the fail of Lost Temple? Other than that, a decent map for sure.
Remove the rocks, remove or alter the ledge and the third is too tucked away. Needs to have at least one alternate pathway.
On June 09 2012 03:25 ThirdDegree wrote: I don't really get the reasoning for Metalopolis getting cut. I was sort of indifferent to that map, so it's not a big deal, but I feel like I see that map in a lot of tournaments.
It's not in any tournament anymore. And it's old.
oh I'm totally an idiot. I was thinking metropolis in my head. I need to not post before lunch.
On June 09 2012 03:36 Millet wrote: The new 1v1 map could be decent if the third wasn't so bad.. First off, rocks? Why does blizzard feel the need to hinder fast third builds for zergs? ZvP will be just like Taldarim altar on this map. Which is just silly. Second, an easily abusable ledge above the third? Did they learn anything form the fail of Lost Temple? Other than that, a decent map for sure.
Remove the rocks, remove or alter the ledge and the third is too tucked away. Needs to have at least one alternate pathway.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
Its funny, cause before I could even hit post a zerg person had quoted him and made a balance complaint.
Then diamond clarifies what he meant, which is completely different than what his post meant. Read my post under the one you quoted for my full example. Also i didn't even beat whoever reported him, so uh, us mortals sometimes know what were talking about?
you're taking this posting thing a little too seriously. lighten up.
Condemed ridge looks like a sure veto for me as Zerg. Not only is it extremely easy for Toss / Terran to defend 2nd and 3rd from 1 point, effectively removing run by or multi-pronged attack options, but the 3rd for Zerg with just be harassed to no end and be killed by tanks / colossi every game.
If they just change the 3rd base they could have a nice map on their hands, but it's just too unfavored for Zerg right now for me too give it a shot.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
I know a Zerg player is posting this just by reading it. Metalopolis is ancient, and just plain terrible. And a map that can be FFEd on shouldnt be made at all, because it simply means Protoss in inherently behind. FFE is really the only viable opening right now(hence why every player except one, NoNY does it in almost every single game) Taking fast third is still possible by having a macro hatch go there, drop the rocks, and then go.
Korhal was a joke of a map, Protoss can only do 2 base allins, as trying to take a third is a nightmare for Protoss. Metalopolis is ages beyond the current metagame, and is just stupidly old.
On June 09 2012 03:36 Millet wrote: The new 1v1 map could be decent if the third wasn't so bad.. First off, rocks? Why does blizzard feel the need to hinder fast third builds for zergs? ZvP will be just like Taldarim altar on this map. Which is just silly. Second, an easily abusable ledge above the third? Did they learn anything form the fail of Lost Temple? Other than that, a decent map for sure.
Remove the rocks, remove or alter the ledge and the third is too tucked away. Needs to have at least one alternate pathway.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
It's not, but it should be a viable build at all times. You don't understand the problem because you are not zerg (obvious). I play all races and know how devastating not getting that third up can be for zerg. Ever tried cannoning the third from a zerg? That is basically a free win for the protoss.
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
Its funny, cause before I could even hit post a zerg person had quoted him and made a balance complaint.
Then diamond clarifies what he meant, which is completely different than what his post meant. Read my post under the one you quoted for my full example. Also i didn't even beat whoever reported him, so uh, us mortals sometimes know what were talking about?
People like you are the reason most community members don't post on TL anymore aside for the occasional one liner. You feel the need to "make a name for yourself" by fighting with notable names.
Well I'm not taking the bait, you continue your campaign about whining about Zerg and see where that gets you.
On June 09 2012 03:36 Millet wrote: The new 1v1 map could be decent if the third wasn't so bad.. First off, rocks? Why does blizzard feel the need to hinder fast third builds for zergs? ZvP will be just like Taldarim altar on this map. Which is just silly. Second, an easily abusable ledge above the third? Did they learn anything form the fail of Lost Temple? Other than that, a decent map for sure.
Remove the rocks, remove or alter the ledge and the third is too tucked away. Needs to have at least one alternate pathway.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
It's not, but it should be a viable build at all times. You don't understand the problem because you are not zerg (obvious). I play all races and know how devastating not getting that third up can be for zerg. Ever tried cannoning the third from a zerg? That is basically a free win for the protoss.
I played zerg before protoss, and still continue to offrace as zerg. Most protoss players actually offrace as zerg, weird huh.
You can still take a fast third, choose one of the bases that doesn't have rocks, or drop it next to the rocks and then when the rocks die take that as your 4th.
Nothing makes you choose that. Either choose a riskier third, or put it next to the rocks. Theres your solutions. Same as taldarim
On June 09 2012 03:36 Millet wrote: The new 1v1 map could be decent if the third wasn't so bad.. First off, rocks? Why does blizzard feel the need to hinder fast third builds for zergs? ZvP will be just like Taldarim altar on this map. Which is just silly. Second, an easily abusable ledge above the third? Did they learn anything form the fail of Lost Temple? Other than that, a decent map for sure.
Remove the rocks, remove or alter the ledge and the third is too tucked away. Needs to have at least one alternate pathway.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
It's not, but it should be a viable build at all times. You don't understand the problem because you are not zerg (obvious). I play all races and know how devastating not getting that third up can be for zerg. Ever tried cannoning the third from a zerg? That is basically a free win for the protoss.
I play toss AND zerg on my own and calling 2-base zerg basically a freewin is so stupid that I even might get warned for this post.
But in order not to get warned here: I think the new map looks really good. The only fear I have is vertikal close spawns when that highground behind your third becomes the hotspot for every drop possible. BTW: Did anyone try yet if it is able to close the ramp to that highground with 1 forcefield? If that is possible warpprism pushes with sentrys might be too powerful...
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
Its funny, cause before I could even hit post a zerg person had quoted him and made a balance complaint.
Then diamond clarifies what he meant, which is completely different than what his post meant. Read my post under the one you quoted for my full example. Also i didn't even beat whoever reported him, so uh, us mortals sometimes know what were talking about?
Was it a balance whine? I don't even understand what the guy is saying:
On June 09 2012 03:17 ZeromuS wrote: Well that sums it up lol. Still, as protoss strong 2 base all in PvZ, PvP wont change much and PvT, templar to defend drops and hopefully with good control we should fine.
Condemned Ridge looks great for air terran tvp.. There's a ton of empty space behind the main/nat and all the expansions. Juicy.. almost makes me want to reinstall
Does 2 base muta play just not exist anymore? Look how much space behind/around bases there is to fly around. And the 4th base doesn't seem that far away if you *really* don't want to make non-drones.
The new map looks pretty good and I am very happy metal is gone, kind of wish Tal was out too but oh well. At least change the ramp or something on Tal.
On June 09 2012 03:05 BandonBanshee wrote: Blizzard can't you fix zvp without cutting a zergs balls off? Rocks at third, no open areas, map covered with ramps and 1 small choke point covers every toss expo. I can't think of a reason blizz would add this map other then padding the toss winrate (because we all know that when the winrates are 50% sc2s glaring issues will be fixed)
I'll be honest I've been reading this post and the others like it with an Eric Cartman voice.
I hope the maps aren't confusing bliz to the core design issues they're having.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
We had those maps, it was called seasons 1 through 4.
In any case, I'm glad Korhal is being removed as 2 base allinning every matchup got stale (I play P) and I've had Metalopolis vetoed since like... Season 3 ish. The new map kinda looks like it'll function like Tal'Darim to me but we will see I guess. Wish they'd add Metropolis back instead of this weird new map, and I'm ready for Shakuras to leave the map pool as well.
Jesus with the rocks on the third, this isn't freakin' beta. If a player wants to expand 20 fucking times, let him; don't put rocks to limit legitimate decision making by a player (my PvZ FFE I look for Zerg to fast 3rd as a major decision point, wtf are rocks doing there?)
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
We had those maps, it was called seasons 1 through 4.
In any case, I'm glad Korhal is being removed as 2 base allinning every matchup got stale (I play P) and I've had Metalopolis vetoed since like... Season 3 ish. The new map kinda looks like it'll function like Tal'Darim to me but we will see I guess. Wish they'd add Metropolis back instead of this weird new map, and I'm ready for Shakuras to leave the map pool as well.
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season. (From OP)
I wish you would read the OP entirely. Anyway, that new map sounds like Lost Plateau / Shakuras Temple to me.
On June 09 2012 04:01 tehemperorer wrote: Jesus with the rocks on the third, this isn't freakin' beta. If a player wants to expand 20 fucking times, let him; don't put rocks to limit legitimate decision making by a player (my PvZ FFE I look for Zerg to fast 3rd as a major decision point, wtf are rocks doing there?)
Alot of zergs are complaining, but i think this map will play out like Taldarim almost exactly.
Mutas will be good, and they can either take a farther away third, or plop the third near the rocks untill they get the rocks dead. I dont think its a huge issue.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
I don't "think" rocks at third isn't all the bad. I summise that it isn't because nothing in the statistics of maps that do have rocks at the third suggest it is imbalanced.
So you can't do your normal bag of tricks. Adapt, play like you did in them other maps with rocks that you've got a 50/50 winrate on.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
It would also be wise for many of you to remember that Zerg needs to be one base ahead of their opponent in most situations.
If a Terran or Protoss fast expands, then Zerg needs to take a fast third or two base all in otherwise they are playing from behind. This doesn't mean every map should give Zerg players an easy fast third, but maps like Ohana and Metropolis offer sensible solutions to that issue by making the third harder to defend without making it impossible to take.
I really don't understand the problem people have with Korhal Compound, it's a beautiful map that plays well in every match up. It doesn't really seem to favour any single race too much and there are multiple ways to play it. Blizzard should really have added Korhal TE (which fixes some of the issues the LE map has) rather than removing it altogether.
It's also a shame to see Metalopolis removed when Shakuras and Tal Darim live on, both of which are far more flawed than Metalopolis ever was.
Not even removing the rocks will save the new map. The ledge behind the third is frankly broken for Sentry drops, proxy pylons and almost any other kind of drop play. No one will be holding a fourth on that map either unless it's a Terran with a PF + Tanks on one of the high ground fourths. We already have a bunch of three base only maps on the ladder (Entombed, Antiga, Ohana) do we really need another?
For all the complaints over Metalopolis and Korhal Compound, I've had those maps come up a surprising amount this season in the ladder, which suggests they aren't as unpopular as a vocal minority seems to make you believe.
We had those maps, it was called seasons 1 through 4.
In any case, I'm glad Korhal is being removed as 2 base allinning every matchup got stale (I play P) and I've had Metalopolis vetoed since like... Season 3 ish. The new map kinda looks like it'll function like Tal'Darim to me but we will see I guess. Wish they'd add Metropolis back instead of this weird new map, and I'm ready for Shakuras to leave the map pool as well.
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season. (From OP)
I wish you would read the OP entirely. Anyway, that new map sounds like Lost Plateau / Shakuras Temple to me.
They're not adding it this season though which is what I was actually talking about. Good lord I didn't think I had to be as specific as a research paper when writing posts on this forum these days.
On June 09 2012 04:01 tehemperorer wrote: Jesus with the rocks on the third, this isn't freakin' beta. If a player wants to expand 20 fucking times, let him; don't put rocks to limit legitimate decision making by a player (my PvZ FFE I look for Zerg to fast 3rd as a major decision point, wtf are rocks doing there?)
With this line of thinking every map should just be a big flat open area with as many minerals as you need.
Map design adds flavor, and gets people to do different things. Rocks are no different than wide/narrow ramps, close expansions, islands, and rush distances in this regard.
All are tweaked to add variety. And the variety between rocks at 3rds and no rocks has not produced any glaring imbalances.
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
It's about the map pool not the map, well sort of about the map.
I have been changing the map scene in huge ways since beta, remind me why my opinion should not matter?
For an insightful person, i dont understand why your questioning it. I gave every reason in my replies. If you want a reason its quite simple: Because you didn't put anything usefull.
Like i just said..A mapmaker/high profile person making a post like that isn't anything. You didn't put a view point. But look at the first zerg who quoted you, he used your '................' to make a balance complaint.
You words hold water, so when you decide to not use them effectively shit gets taken out of hand.
edit: its also the reason somebody else beat me to reporting you, your second post should have been the only post needed, hopefully other zerg players wont quote you like the dude under your post thinking your making a balance complaint. It still amazes me 'community' people dont know how to act in a community
? Stop trying to start a fight, to be fair I quoted him for what he intended. The map seems to be going against a decent number of things we have learned about how to make solid maps all heavily influenced by the work Diamond and ESV are doing.
Im not Zerg, im not complaining about the map balance because of no easy third. But we have all decided that rocks on the third are bad because they limit strategies as opposed to creating them.
For example, in PvT there is the very cool fast third build style. With a 3 or 4 gate off of an FE into fast third then really quick upgrades and charge/blink with later AoE.
In PvZ, one of the ways to deal with 3 hatch fast max roaches is to take a quick 3rd in response, off of a sentry based army which wouldn't have the dps to kill the rocks (lets say zerg hides a third). Against muta based play, having to kill the rocks makes it very very hard to secure a third. Its not so bad on maps that don't have rocks, but the need to kill the rocks and any zerglings that try to attack, and the time it takes to kill the rocks all make it very difficult to deal with mutas into expand. This has been seen so so many times on Tal darim, so its only fair to point that out I think that diamond has a point when he posts the "....." post.
This map seems like something blizzard made a while ago and is just kind of putting out there completely ignoring the fact that:
1) the best maps, dont have rocks at the third 2) the most popular maps are for the most part community made 3) the community wants community maps in the ladder 4) the other maps that were introduced from tournies were play tested, then proven good then included again 5) Korhal was removed because of problems with the map that were fixed in a new edition that was ready for season 7 but wasn't used.
'.......................' Doesn't sum up shit, dont try to say it does. Just like i said a few posts above. Somebody 'known' making a post like that and the shitty zerg people will jump all over it
It's about the map pool not the map, well sort of about the map.
I have been changing the map scene in huge ways since beta, remind me why my opinion should not matter?
For an insightful person, i dont understand why your questioning it. I gave every reason in my replies. If you want a reason its quite simple: Because you didn't put anything usefull.
Like i just said..A mapmaker/high profile person making a post like that isn't anything. You didn't put a view point. But look at the first zerg who quoted you, he used your '................' to make a balance complaint.
You words hold water, so when you decide to not use them effectively shit gets taken out of hand.
edit: its also the reason somebody else beat me to reporting you, your second post should have been the only post needed, hopefully other zerg players wont quote you like the dude under your post thinking your making a balance complaint. It still amazes me 'community' people dont know how to act in a community
? Stop trying to start a fight, to be fair I quoted him for what he intended. The map seems to be going against a decent number of things we have learned about how to make solid maps all heavily influenced by the work Diamond and ESV are doing.
Im not Zerg, im not complaining about the map balance because of no easy third. But we have all decided that rocks on the third are bad because they limit strategies as opposed to creating them.
For example, in PvT there is the very cool fast third build style. With a 3 or 4 gate off of an FE into fast third then really quick upgrades and charge/blink with later AoE.
In PvZ, one of the ways to deal with 3 hatch fast max roaches is to take a quick 3rd in response, off of a sentry based army which wouldn't have the dps to kill the rocks (lets say zerg hides a third). Against muta based play, having to kill the rocks makes it very very hard to secure a third. Its not so bad on maps that don't have rocks, but the need to kill the rocks and any zerglings that try to attack, and the time it takes to kill the rocks all make it very difficult to deal with mutas into expand. This has been seen so so many times on Tal darim, so its only fair to point that out I think that diamond has a point when he posts the "....." post.
This map seems like something blizzard made a while ago and is just kind of putting out there completely ignoring the fact that:
1) the best maps, dont have rocks at the third 2) the most popular maps are for the most part community made 3) the community wants community maps in the ladder 4) the other maps that were introduced from tournies were play tested, then proven good then included again 5) Korhal was removed because of problems with the map that were fixed in a new edition that was ready for season 7 but wasn't used.
Now these... These are all very valid reasons. Thanks for posting them. It a breath of fresh air among all the ridiculous whining.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
Then I'd do a different build order. "Standard" is not the "Only" way to play.
What this guy said. Id do a 1 gate expand
Simple enough. Why must there only be 1 opening that is viable? Zergs have just gotten way to used to 3 free bases. Take your 3rd in a vulnerable spot. Taking a 3rd that quick should put you at some kind of disadvantage.
Zergs have gotten used to 3 base openings because it's the only viable way to stop 2 base all-ins. Rocks at the 3rd work for Tal'darim because there is a massive ramp to the natural, and 2-base aggression is possible. Small ramp and rocks at the 3rd is just stupid.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
Then I'd do a different build order. "Standard" is not the "Only" way to play.
What this guy said. Id do a 1 gate expand
Simple enough. Why must there only be 1 opening that is viable? Zergs have just gotten way to used to 3 free bases. Take your 3rd in a vulnerable spot. Taking a 3rd that quick should put you at some kind of disadvantage.
Zergs have gotten used to 3 base openings because it's the only viable way to stop 2 base all-ins.
Come on now, you don't think this is a bit presumptuous? To believe that every strategy for a situation has been discovered and only one of them works. Really?
If this were true than every game PvT on a map with rocks would have been won with a 2base all in. Protoss would have figured this out, and the racial balance for those maps would have been very in favor of toss. But they aren't. They're still 50/50.
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
You mean turtle till your near max and win? So much fun right I bet u heart emtombed too.
If anything, defending 3base Roach is far more turtley than playing standard. I don't really like Entombed because the main is so small and close positions is lame. Maybe Zergs will have to innovate beyond 1 build against Toss, though, which is nice.
Yes zergs should try new build like ling baneling play zvp but a third is still needed for that. IDK what you want zergs to do against ffe other than a fast third - it's either a fast third or a gimmicky 2 base all-in build.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
You mean turtle till your near max and win? So much fun right I bet u heart emtombed too.
If anything, defending 3base Roach is far more turtley than playing standard. I don't really like Entombed because the main is so small and close positions is lame. Maybe Zergs will have to innovate beyond 1 build against Toss, though, which is nice.
Yes zergs should try new build like ling baneling play zvp but a third is still needed for that. IDK what you want zergs to do against ffe other than a fast third - it's either a fast third or a gimmicky 2 base all-in build.
I'm fine with them taking fast third; it's more that with this map 3base Roach will be weak cause there's no room for multipronged. I actually don't care if there are rocks there, to be honest.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
please enlighten me about the power of 2 base zerg macro builds against a FFE toss
Ok
1. Play it like taldarim. Put your third base next to the rocks while you slowly kill the rocks, drop your 4th once the rocks are dead.
2. Take a fucking different base that is more vulnerable???? I know, not being able to take bases before making a handful of lings is sooo wrong
Please. There are many viable builds
I have taldarim vetoed like many other zergs because putting the base beside the rocks puts you at a disadvantage as zerg, so that's out. The alternative third on taldarim isn't too bad so that's ok option I guess.
The problem with this shitty new map is that there really isn't a viable alternate third. The only alternate third there is means the zerg is expanding directly into the toss and it would be almost impossible to defend the 2 base all ins you protoss players enjoy so very much.
Please. Don't come on here and pretend you have all the answers for zerg players because you very clearly don't.
On June 08 2012 23:56 Morphs wrote: The new 1v1 map looks like a POS Blizzard map.
- Rocks at 3rd: zerghate. - High ground cliff behind 3rd: Terran love (siege tanks will own there). - Only 1 (!) entrance to defend all three bases. How easy can you make it for T and P?
Looks like their mapmaking "team" still consists of clueless people... and there definitely is no Zerg player among them... sigh.. I guess we have a new insta-veto.
As a Protoss player, I like maps where I can do something other than defend 3base Roach every game.
You mean turtle till your near max and win? So much fun right I bet u heart emtombed too.
If anything, defending 3base Roach is far more turtley than playing standard. I don't really like Entombed because the main is so small and close positions is lame. Maybe Zergs will have to innovate beyond 1 build against Toss, though, which is nice.
Yes zergs should try new build like ling baneling play zvp but a third is still needed for that. IDK what you want zergs to do against ffe other than a fast third - it's either a fast third or a gimmicky 2 base all-in build.
I'm fine with them taking fast third; it's more that with this map 3base Roach will be weak cause there's no room for multipronged. I actually don't care if there are rocks there, to be honest.
You should care if the rocks are there, they are like your ally against zerg.
On June 09 2012 02:52 avc wrote: To all you Protoss players thinking the rocks are fine, imagine a map where you cannot possibly FFE due to an ultra wide ramp making it impossible to wall off.
Then I'd do a different build order. "Standard" is not the "Only" way to play.
What this guy said. Id do a 1 gate expand
Simple enough. Why must there only be 1 opening that is viable? Zergs have just gotten way to used to 3 free bases. Take your 3rd in a vulnerable spot. Taking a 3rd that quick should put you at some kind of disadvantage.
Zergs have gotten used to 3 base openings because it's the only viable way to stop 2 base all-ins.
Come on now, you don't think this is a bit presumptuous? To believe that every strategy for a situation has been discovered and only one of them works. Really?
If this were true than every game PvT on a map with rocks would have been won with a 2base all in. Protoss would have figured this out, and the racial balance for those maps would have been very in favor of toss. But they aren't. They're still 50/50.
Not at all presumptuous given the current state of a game. If you could show me a Zerg who is comfortable stopping a 2-base immortal all-in off of 2 bases, I would happily pipe down and redact my statements.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
please enlighten me about the power of 2 base zerg macro builds against a FFE toss
Ok
1. Play it like taldarim. Put your third base next to the rocks while you slowly kill the rocks, drop your 4th once the rocks are dead.
2. Take a fucking different base that is more vulnerable???? I know, not being able to take bases before making a handful of lings is sooo wrong
Please. There are many viable builds
I have taldarim vetoed like many other zergs because putting the base beside the rocks puts you at a disadvantage as zerg, so that's out. The alternative third on taldarim isn't too bad so that's ok option I guess.
The problem with this shitty new map is that there really isn't a viable alternate third. The only alternate third there is means the zerg is expanding directly into the toss and it would be almost impossible to defend the 2 base all ins you protoss players enjoy so very much.
Please. Don't come on here and pretend you have all the answers for zerg players because you very clearly don't.
At least he's trying to think about the issue instead of immediately vetoing, never playing that map or circumstance, and instead whining about "blizzard and their fuckin' rocks".
We don't have all the answers. Sometimes maps will have slight advantages and disadvantages for certain races. This is not necesarrily a bad thing. Balance in broodwar was achieved with maps. For all we know 3 fast bases for zerg might be OP. We would never know unless we add limitations to how things work for each race, and see how it plays out. Historically zergs win just as much on maps with rocks at the third as other races do. But if you take, say, Taldarim, which zergs had 75% in before the rocks were added, then maybe you can understand why rocks, from other races perspective aren't really a bad thing.
On June 09 2012 03:13 Diamond wrote: ......................
Big time community members, or at least 'bigger' than most should not make posts like this. Your view really isn't different than any other person's, yet because your 'known' if you do something like what you just did, every mid0-tier zerg and lower will jump the 'fuck this map' bandwagon because somebody they 'know of' in the community said it.
quiet mortal. don't bother the gods with your inferior concerns.
Its funny, cause before I could even hit post a zerg person had quoted him and made a balance complaint.
Then diamond clarifies what he meant, which is completely different than what his post meant. Read my post under the one you quoted for my full example. Also i didn't even beat whoever reported him, so uh, us mortals sometimes know what were talking about?
People like you are the reason most community members don't post on TL anymore aside for the occasional one liner. You feel the need to "make a name for yourself" by fighting with notable names.
Well I'm not taking the bait, you continue your campaign about whining about Zerg and see where that gets you.
On May 27 2012 12:54 Liquid`Ret wrote: im so fucking sad that i lose to this shit every single tournamment it doesnt matter if i macro inject and overlord perfectly i just get raped by ff's no chance... and if you open anything other than 3 base they can just play something else so gg
We still love you Ret!
i dont care if you love me honestly (I do care, but you get what I mean) I want to win games and in practice i beat everybody the last 4 days then tournament day comes boom the grubby build that im 0-8 vs no matter what i do ROFL
Your frustrations would be better spent on practice instead of QQ on the forums. I'm not saying this to be mean, but there are plenty of ways to deal with that build, and there is no excuse to be losing that much to it. Get someone to help you out, there are plenty of protosses out there that would help you with that, maybe some on your own team.
You are one of the top players in the world and in my opnion, a top 3 zerg with a LOT of succes vs. protoss. It's okay to lose to players who are at the top of their game and their races, just hang in there and work it out.
ya the few minutes its taking him to write out posts venting frustration while still at the tournament are severely damaging his practice regime. shut the fuck up. you're the reason pros dont post on here anymore.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
The fact that you say you have never seen a gsl terran win on CK alone betrays your ignorance on this matter.
The stats don't lie. 51% TvP in korean tournament matches should give you pause when you make such outlandizh, ridiuculous claims
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
And? I'm pointing out that the winrate isn't 80% in favor of toss like he said. Statistics aren't everything, no, but it's a better tool for analysis than what you've "never seen in GSL" Or what paltry bit you've looked through before making a determination that all the terran players were "heads and shoulders" above the toss players.
Fucking fuck I hoped that Blizzard realized something last season and would never add own maps in the pool again but now we got 3 new complete shit maps. Not removing Entombed Valley and removing High Orbit seriously blizzard fucking ruining shit up 2012.
Removing Korhal Compound LE, because not used in tournaments, and they really think that ass drool Condemned Ridge will be used in tournaments. I mean its even really positionally imbalaced.
I really like the high ground above the 3rd mineral line on the new 1v1 map, that is some smart designer that knew terran drops were simply inefficient at killing probes and no one on ladder was doing it since it was to damn hard and no rewarding at all to bring down 20 workers in 5 seconds... thus he gave us a high ground from which marines can slaughter probes and drones safely. That said, meta and korhal are 2 maps i veto, so this season i basically gain 1 veto... yey for me i guess.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
please enlighten me about the power of 2 base zerg macro builds against a FFE toss
Ok
1. Play it like taldarim. Put your third base next to the rocks while you slowly kill the rocks, drop your 4th once the rocks are dead.
2. Take a fucking different base that is more vulnerable???? I know, not being able to take bases before making a handful of lings is sooo wrong
Please. There are many viable builds
I have taldarim vetoed like many other zergs because putting the base beside the rocks puts you at a disadvantage as zerg, so that's out. The alternative third on taldarim isn't too bad so that's ok option I guess.
The problem with this shitty new map is that there really isn't a viable alternate third. The only alternate third there is means the zerg is expanding directly into the toss and it would be almost impossible to defend the 2 base all ins you protoss players enjoy so very much.
Please. Don't come on here and pretend you have all the answers for zerg players because you very clearly don't.
At least he's trying to think about the issue instead of immediately vetoing, never playing that map or circumstance, and instead whining about "blizzard and their fuckin' rocks".
We don't have all the answers. Sometimes maps will have slight advantages and disadvantages for certain races. This is not necesarrily a bad thing. Balance in broodwar was achieved with maps. For all we know 3 fast bases for zerg might be OP. We would never know unless we add limitations to how things work for each race, and see how it plays out. Historically zergs win just as much on maps with rocks at the third as other races do. But if you take, say, Taldarim, which zergs had 75% in before the rocks were added, then maybe you can understand why rocks, from other races perspective aren't really a bad thing.
Did you even read my post? I said taldarim isn't too bad because the alternative third is in an ok position, on this new map it isn't viable at all. I don't need to play the map to determine that I can't expand directly into a protoss who will probably just 2 base all in and kill me.
And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
If Blizzard made it, you can be damn well certain droves of people will bitch about it. If there are gold bases or rocks this bitching will go up exponentially by the number of rocks and gold mineral patches in the game.
why must zergs think that 'fast 3rd' builds are the only viable builds?
please enlighten me about the power of 2 base zerg macro builds against a FFE toss
Ok
1. Play it like taldarim. Put your third base next to the rocks while you slowly kill the rocks, drop your 4th once the rocks are dead.
2. Take a fucking different base that is more vulnerable???? I know, not being able to take bases before making a handful of lings is sooo wrong
Please. There are many viable builds
I have taldarim vetoed like many other zergs because putting the base beside the rocks puts you at a disadvantage as zerg, so that's out. The alternative third on taldarim isn't too bad so that's ok option I guess.
The problem with this shitty new map is that there really isn't a viable alternate third. The only alternate third there is means the zerg is expanding directly into the toss and it would be almost impossible to defend the 2 base all ins you protoss players enjoy so very much.
Please. Don't come on here and pretend you have all the answers for zerg players because you very clearly don't.
At least he's trying to think about the issue instead of immediately vetoing, never playing that map or circumstance, and instead whining about "blizzard and their fuckin' rocks".
We don't have all the answers. Sometimes maps will have slight advantages and disadvantages for certain races. This is not necesarrily a bad thing. Balance in broodwar was achieved with maps. For all we know 3 fast bases for zerg might be OP. We would never know unless we add limitations to how things work for each race, and see how it plays out. Historically zergs win just as much on maps with rocks at the third as other races do. But if you take, say, Taldarim, which zergs had 75% in before the rocks were added, then maybe you can understand why rocks, from other races perspective aren't really a bad thing.
Did you even read my post? I said taldarim isn't too bad because the alternative third is in an ok position, on this new map it isn't viable at all. I don't need to play the map to determine that I can't expand directly into a protoss who will probably just 2 base all in and kill me.
And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
I made a similar point. Tal'darim also (kinda) works with rocks at the third because of the larger ramp. 2 base aggression works since the protoss will have more trouble hiding behind a wall-in. This map has rocks and a small easily walled off ramp. Needs a fix
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point. Now its not that bad anymore, still bad, but the tank style isnt coming from fxo terrans every single progamer has tried it on ck from the begginning. That being said the map is intersting and its better than what blizzard usually does, and of u try something new mistakes are to be expected... And lol at bashing foreign progamers, very nice of you
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point.
When there was less than 20 games played on it? How things were doesn't mean shit. It's how things are that matters.
On June 09 2012 04:45 Uncultured wrote: The Blizzard Map Certainty Principle:
If Blizzard made it, you can be damn well certain droves of people will bitch about it. If there are gold bases or rocks this bitching will go up exponentially by the number of rocks and gold mineral patches in the game.
Probably has something to do with the fact that blizzard has never made a quality map in their decade+ of making strategy gamez. Their bad map design is something they are internationally famous for in contrast to their historically excellent game design.
As for rocks and golds, they have been proven over and over and over to cause imbalance and to fail to.achieve blizzards initial intention for them
On June 09 2012 02:20 mewbert wrote: zerg is extremely strong right now, stop complaining about a map that might not favor you when your race is doing really well, if this map didnt have rocks on it it would be unplayable
Oh so we as zerg players should just accept that we have to do 2 base all ins against toss? Those rocks with no alternate third make zvp unplayable on that map.
Zerg player's questioning a map's balance issues shouldn't be stopped because zerg is strong atm - Go back to reddit...
The rocks at the 3rd makes this map an automatic down-vote. Why do they seriously think that it is needed, it's not balanced for Zerg to run a mile away to take a 3rd because your natural gets blocked by a fucking pylon, while they safely take a fast expo back home.
On June 09 2012 04:45 Uncultured wrote: The Blizzard Map Certainty Principle:
If Blizzard made it, you can be damn well certain droves of people will bitch about it. If there are gold bases or rocks this bitching will go up exponentially by the number of rocks and gold mineral patches in the game.
Probably has something to do with the fact that blizzard has never made a quality map in their decade+ of making strategy gamez. Their bad map design is something they are internationally famous for in contrast to their historically excellent game design.
As for rocks and golds, they have been proven over and over and over to cause imbalance and to fail to.achieve blizzards initial intention for them
All reasons why my proposed principle should be publicized. (pardon my alliteration)
On June 09 2012 04:45 Uncultured wrote: The Blizzard Map Certainty Principle:
If Blizzard made it, you can be damn well certain droves of people will bitch about it. If there are gold bases or rocks this bitching will go up exponentially by the number of rocks and gold mineral patches in the game.
Probably has something to do with the fact that blizzard has never made a quality map in their decade+ of making strategy gamez. Their bad map design is something they are internationally famous for in contrast to their historically excellent game design.
As for rocks and golds, they have been proven over and over and over to cause imbalance and to fail to.achieve blizzards initial intention for them
All reasons why my proposed principle should be publicized. (pardon my alliteration)
I lol'd. Also, am I just crazy in the fact that the fourth could be taken as a third base depending on spawning positions for the zerg? Maybe I am but... I think it's an option?
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
Zerg does neeeeed a fast third against ffe to play a safe game, that's just the way it is. Zerg can still win by doing crappy and risky 2 base all ins but that isn't the way zerg should be played - the mechanics of the race make it hard to do so.
"explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure" LOL yes exploring shit a bit further, i.e. doing a couple crappy builds and losing a lot, seems like a really good idea to me. No thanks, I think I'll just veto it, it's not like it'll ever be used in any tournament play anyways.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point. Now its not that bad anymore, still bad, but the tank style isnt coming from fxo terrans every single progamer has tried it on ck from the begginning. That being said the map is intersting and its better than what blizzard usually does, and of u try something new mistakes are to be expected... And lol at bashing foreign progamers, very nice of you
You are baselessly bashing one of the single best spectator maps in starcraft 2s history and you are upset when i bash bad players that play incorrectly? You are the reason I make simple posts like "i want to slap blizzard" because if i write out a long coherent post backed up by factual evidence, someone like you comes along and pulls completely fabricated statistics out of nowhere and argues thing that are straight up wrong.
The map was NEVER at 80% in any matchup. Do your research before you spew such textual diarrhea, or better yet if you have no clue what you are talking about stop trolling and dont post at all
For the record the tank style wasnt used for weeks if not months after ck's release
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
Zerg does neeeeed a fast third against ffe to play a safe game, that's just the way it is. Zerg can still win by doing crappy and risky 2 base all ins but that isn't the way zerg should be played - the mechanics of the race make it hard to do so.
"explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure" LOL yes exploring shit a bit further, i.e. doing a couple crappy builds and losing a lot, seems like a really good idea to me. No thanks, I think I'll just veto it, it's not like it'll ever be used in any tournament play anyways.
Well I think it's pretty clear where you stand then. Also, people said that Entombed would never see tournament play too,
On June 09 2012 04:45 Uncultured wrote: The Blizzard Map Certainty Principle:
If Blizzard made it, you can be damn well certain droves of people will bitch about it. If there are gold bases or rocks this bitching will go up exponentially by the number of rocks and gold mineral patches in the game.
Probably has something to do with the fact that blizzard has never made a quality map in their decade+ of making strategy gamez. Their bad map design is something they are internationally famous for in contrast to their historically excellent game design.
As for rocks and golds, they have been proven over and over and over to cause imbalance and to fail to.achieve blizzards initial intention for them
All reasons why my proposed principle should be publicized. (pardon my alliteration)
I lol'd. Also, am I just crazy in the fact that the fourth could be taken as a third base depending on spawning positions for the zerg? Maybe I am but... I think it's an option?
I think it would work fine if it was cross positions only. However if you spawn horizontally then it most likely wouldn't work.
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
Zerg does neeeeed a fast third against ffe to play a safe game, that's just the way it is. Zerg can still win by doing crappy and risky 2 base all ins but that isn't the way zerg should be played - the mechanics of the race make it hard to do so.
"explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure" LOL yes exploring shit a bit further, i.e. doing a couple crappy builds and losing a lot, seems like a really good idea to me. No thanks, I think I'll just veto it, it's not like it'll ever be used in any tournament play anyways.
Well I think it's pretty clear where you stand then. Also, people said that Entombed would never see tournament play too,
Entombed shouldn't have seen tournament play. It didnt get used in tournaments because it is good, it got used in tournaments because tournament organizers are not progamers and have a tough time discerning what will be a good map for their tournament, so they look to ladder.
Hell, look at korhal. The tournament edition is VASTLY superior to the ladder edition, yet there are tournments that choose to use to use the ladder version despite its huge balance issues
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
Zerg does neeeeed a fast third against ffe to play a safe game, that's just the way it is. Zerg can still win by doing crappy and risky 2 base all ins but that isn't the way zerg should be played - the mechanics of the race make it hard to do so.
"explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure" LOL yes exploring shit a bit further, i.e. doing a couple crappy builds and losing a lot, seems like a really good idea to me. No thanks, I think I'll just veto it, it's not like it'll ever be used in any tournament play anyways.
Well I think it's pretty clear where you stand then. Also, people said that Entombed would never see tournament play too,
Entombed cross positions isn't bad at all, and there are no rocks at the third.... If they modify this map I'm sure it'll make it into tournament play but in its current state there is no way.
On June 09 2012 04:43 knOxStarcraft wrote: And yes, fast 3 base from zerg might be OP - FFE might be OP as well? Zerg NEEDS that fast third vs FFE, that is an answer I do have. So when Blizzard puts rocks at the third with no alternative third that's viable i will veto their silly map immediately and I'm sure every other decent zerg will as well.
That could very well be. Difference here between you and me, is I don't know, and say I don't know. You don't know and claim you do know. You claim that "zerg neeeeeds a fast third to beat a toss FFE" like it's some well known, long established fact.
I'm just saying let the map be so we can explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure. Don't immediately veto it because it's slightly unfavorable for you at the moment.
Zerg does neeeeed a fast third against ffe to play a safe game, that's just the way it is. Zerg can still win by doing crappy and risky 2 base all ins but that isn't the way zerg should be played - the mechanics of the race make it hard to do so.
"explore shit a bit further and figure these things out for sure" LOL yes exploring shit a bit further, i.e. doing a couple crappy builds and losing a lot, seems like a really good idea to me. No thanks, I think I'll just veto it, it's not like it'll ever be used in any tournament play anyways.
Well I think it's pretty clear where you stand then. Also, people said that Entombed would never see tournament play too,
Entombed cross positions isn't bad at all, and there are no rocks at the third.... If they modify this map I'm sure it'll make it into tournament play but in its current state there is no way.
This is a good point, entombed would be pretty bad if some tournaments weren't forcing cross spots.
I'm quite curious, what is the point to the cliff above the third with rocks? It really seems the only thing that could be used for is for putting tanks to siege mineral lines or using for drops.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point. Now its not that bad anymore, still bad, but the tank style isnt coming from fxo terrans every single progamer has tried it on ck from the begginning. That being said the map is intersting and its better than what blizzard usually does, and of u try something new mistakes are to be expected... And lol at bashing foreign progamers, very nice of you
You are baselessly bashing one of the single best spectator maps in starcraft 2s history and you are upset when i bash bad players that play incorrectly? You are the reason I make simple posts like "i want to slap blizzard" because if i write out a long coherent post backed up by factual evidence, someone like you comes along and pulls completely fabricated statistics out of nowhere and argues thing that are straight up wrong.
The map was NEVER at 80% in any matchup. Do your research before you spew such textual diarrhea, or better yet if you have no clue what you are talking about stop trolling and dont post at all
For the record the tank style wasnt used for weeks if not months after ck's release
Just for the record if you adjust TLPD to individual league the stats become 56-44 for Toss. I wanted to see how the GSL record is to see how the stats look like in really important games but couldn't find a way to adjust. The Map is Toss favored once the later stages are reached and different playstyle than Bio become less effective. Tankstyle for example doesn't sound like something that should work after the midgame unless the Toss funnels everything through chokes for whatever reason.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point. Now its not that bad anymore, still bad, but the tank style isnt coming from fxo terrans every single progamer has tried it on ck from the begginning. That being said the map is intersting and its better than what blizzard usually does, and of u try something new mistakes are to be expected... And lol at bashing foreign progamers, very nice of you
You are baselessly bashing one of the single best spectator maps in starcraft 2s history and you are upset when i bash bad players that play incorrectly? You are the reason I make simple posts like "i want to slap blizzard" because if i write out a long coherent post backed up by factual evidence, someone like you comes along and pulls completely fabricated statistics out of nowhere and argues thing that are straight up wrong.
The map was NEVER at 80% in any matchup. Do your research before you spew such textual diarrhea, or better yet if you have no clue what you are talking about stop trolling and dont post at all
For the record the tank style wasnt used for weeks if not months after ck's release
Just for the record if you adjust TLPD to individual league the stats become 56-44 for Toss. I wanted to see how the GSL record is to see how the stats look like in really important games but couldn't find a way to adjust. The Map is Toss favored once the later stages are reached and different playstyle than Bio become less effective. Tankstyle for example doesn't sound like something that should work after the midgame unless the Toss funnels everything through chokes for whatever reason.
That is like saying a current map is zvt favored for zerg. It's overall game balance, not map balance.
Can you tell me a map that is currently T favored in the lategame for TvP? It's generally understood right now that lategame TvP is slightly P favored, so I dont understand what point you are trying to make.
Rocks at third, instant veto, pls try harder blizzard. I think that as a zerg my three vetoes will probably look like everyone else's: Antiga, this new map, and either (Entombed/TDA).
On June 09 2012 02:04 TUski wrote: Rocks on the third and ridges above bases got old when Lost Temple was around. Does blizzard even THINK when they make maps?
Oh wow I didn't even notice the ridges at the third, that is quite simply appalling.
edit: wait, is that a ramp to the highground behind the third, or not? I cannot tell. Maybe if it's a ramp that would make it interesting at the very least.
On June 09 2012 04:17 SupLilSon wrote: God damn you Blizzard. How in hell is CK still around in the map pool?? At least tweak it so its not 80% PvT......
I've never seen a GSL Terran win on that Map and looking through the matches most of the Terrans that won that been heads and shoulders above their opponent..
You can win on that Map if you win before 3 Bases but once 3 Bases are up it becomes impossible to stop a HT/Colossi from beeing build and you will probably lose the match. Its just impossible to attack a Toss on 3 Bases on that Map and even drops are almost shutdown just by mapdesign.
Wrong. Go watch some korean weekly pvts on ck. Fxo terrans have shown tank openers into a standard lategame to be extremely strong.
I have seen countless pvts on ck between evenly matched players where the terran winsa legitimate game. You just are not supposed to.play the same style you would on a map like shattered temple.or entombed alley... a concept that seems to go right over many players' heads (especially many foreigners that play the same style on every map)
lol Orb the map used to be 80% pvt at some point. Now its not that bad anymore, still bad, but the tank style isnt coming from fxo terrans every single progamer has tried it on ck from the begginning. That being said the map is intersting and its better than what blizzard usually does, and of u try something new mistakes are to be expected... And lol at bashing foreign progamers, very nice of you
You are baselessly bashing one of the single best spectator maps in starcraft 2s history and you are upset when i bash bad players that play incorrectly? You are the reason I make simple posts like "i want to slap blizzard" because if i write out a long coherent post backed up by factual evidence, someone like you comes along and pulls completely fabricated statistics out of nowhere and argues thing that are straight up wrong.
The map was NEVER at 80% in any matchup. Do your research before you spew such textual diarrhea, or better yet if you have no clue what you are talking about stop trolling and dont post at all
For the record the tank style wasnt used for weeks if not months after ck's release
Just for the record if you adjust TLPD to individual league the stats become 56-44 for Toss. I wanted to see how the GSL record is to see how the stats look like in really important games but couldn't find a way to adjust. The Map is Toss favored once the later stages are reached and different playstyle than Bio become less effective. Tankstyle for example doesn't sound like something that should work after the midgame unless the Toss funnels everything through chokes for whatever reason.
That is like saying a current map is zvt favored for zerg. It's overall game balance, not map balance.
Can you tell me a map that is currently T favored in the lategame for TvP? It's generally understood right now that lategame TvP is slightly P favored, so I dont understand what point you are trying to make.
The way CK is structured its harder to prevent TvP lategame from happening with all the chokes and ramps that are hard to attack up against Storm and/or Colossi.
That's what I wrote on the eu forums as feedback to the maps.
Dear blizzard, I am a high master protoss player around ~1600 points. Condemned bridge is a very nice map and I thank you for making it, don't listen to the haters, just like they didn't like entombed valley at first, they don't like this, however both those map are very similar and take a new step in macro maps.
There is one issue though, even me as a protoss player, I can see that this map is clearly not favorable for zerg players. In the current metagame, zerg must most of the time take a fast 3rd against protoss, and it is not possible on this map, and there's no good alternative 3rd that made it possible for zerg to play like on Tal'darim altar. Please remove the rocks, as the 3rd is already not that "easy" to defend with the high ground behind it and the line of sight blockers.
I would want to say that since you want to encourage macro play with those maps, while allowing players still to be offensive in the early and mid game. (like the good drop location on the high ground against 3rd, or line of sight blocker which allows runbys). There one problem I heard terrans complaining that they can't deal with zerg late game, since they were relying on dealing damage to him in the early game which is not possible due to queen upgrade. I suggest you either remove queen range buff, or make ghosts a possiblity for late game TvZ. As for PvZ, if you remove the rocks, this map will be great for it.
That's all my feedback, I hope you read this. To sum it up: "Remove rocks, then it's perfect map".
I also think the cliff behind the 3rd isn't stupid, it encourages more play using divided forces and not just a moving your deathball. And using the map itself for new strategies.
I also like that blizzard makes new 2v2 maps for the team gamers around there. Also the return of Metalopolis while removing Metropolis, Metalopolis is truly a very fun map to play on.
I feel like Molten Crater with a few major changes would make a better 1v1 map than that other shit they put out.
If they moved the third/second main (for allies), made the center slightly more open but also add a few spots with more high ground and remove some of the rocks (as well as the gold base rocks/gold minerals) they have a really good map, but maybe I'm crazy O.o
When wil blizzard learn that their maps are terrible more often than not. I wish they would just get with the program and use tournament maps, with the tournament features. Why do they always wait so long to implement good features.
That new map is horribly imbalanced for PvZ. Protoss not only has a ridiculously easy to defend natural and 3rd, but the rocks block the third as well. No idea how a zerg player would win on that unless they all in.
I would rather have Atlantis spaceship but the way Zerg is raping right now I guess it's better they didn't add it. And thank god metal is finally gone
On June 09 2012 06:04 Spiner wrote: When I play zerg on that map im totally going to build a wall separating the 3rd from the highground position where ill have tanks, turrets and thors
I don't think you will be able to that, because no zerg will play that map.
I really don't like these increasingly larger maps. Protoss have gotten to a point where the abuse of warp gates and hidden proxies are fucking impossible to scout and defend with these large maps. That coupled with the fact that if they see a push coming, they have that much more time to get up sentries, units, colossi, etc. Don't mind my Terran qq though. >_>
Yeah on second thought, Condemned Ridge looks just horrible for zerg. I'll be vetoing that as a replacement for vetoing narrow Metalopolis. Sigh blizzard why do you do this to me every season. Replace one map I don't like with another.
Metal is FINALLY out! OMG YES! I just hate that map...
Korhal Compound was also kind of annoying but the main thing I am happy about is Metal being taken out. I like the new map as well, it reminds me of Shakuras and there aren't enough 4 player maps on ladder anymore..
The 2v2 maps I am kind of happy about as well.. I absolutely HATE discord IV, and High Orbit can be rather annoying as well.
Metalolpolis was a great map but its bin in the map pool for to long. Condemned ridge seems pretty interesting and looks like a decent map i like the rocks covering the third to prevent a fast third from Zerg and i also like the high ground behind the third where tanks could be placed to harass but there is a ramp to that high ground so it's not as bad as the lost temple high ground. I am a bit concern with the map pool in general though I think they should have at least 10 maps and currently they have 9 and with this update it looks like it will be 8 which i don't believe is a good thing. there should be more variation in the maps and more maps in my opinion but i digress. I'm not much of a 2v2 player but desolate strong hold looks really interesting especially because the players share a high ground and there is 4 gold bases which would be great for 2v2.
On June 09 2012 22:48 kAelle_sc wrote: Why is Metalopolis out? I was hoping Tal'darim Altar would be out since Zerg has the disadvantage in getting their 3rd.
It is hugely zergfavored and has been in the pool forever
On June 09 2012 22:48 kAelle_sc wrote: Why is Metalopolis out? I was hoping Tal'darim Altar would be out since Zerg has the disadvantage in getting their 3rd.
And Korhal Compound, they haven't considered the Korhal Compound TE version? [tournament edition]
Was there a specific reason that we don't have a winter map tileset? I faintly remember hearing one, but I can't remember if it was official or just rumor.
On June 11 2012 07:30 Angel_ wrote: Was there a specific reason that we don't have a winter map tileset? I faintly remember hearing one, but I can't remember if it was official or just rumor.
I have no idea. Dont we have a version of Bel'shir beach being winter?
Probably just holding it from us so they can have it as a "feature" in HoTS, all the previews have been on winter maps afaik?
On June 09 2012 22:48 kAelle_sc wrote: Why is Metalopolis out? I was hoping Tal'darim Altar would be out since Zerg has the disadvantage in getting their 3rd.
It is hugely zergfavored and has been in the pool forever
It's actually not zerg favored its favored for toss pvz, and terran tvz (unless it's cross positions that's the only position it favors zerg zvt).
Glad to see korhal gone hated zvp on that map, metal thank god was sick of that map to, new map looks dumb and is instantly being veto'd :D
On June 11 2012 07:30 Angel_ wrote: Was there a specific reason that we don't have a winter map tileset? I faintly remember hearing one, but I can't remember if it was official or just rumor.
I have no idea. Dont we have a version of Bel'shir beach being winter?
Probably just holding it from us so they can have it as a "feature" in HoTS, all the previews have been on winter maps afaik?
Didn't pros complain that the brightness of winter maps hurt their eyes during long practice sessions?
Rocks on the third...thanks blizz...sincerely Zerg players everywhere
Also they removed metal for a season...why do people seem to forget that. I like the map but it rarely comes up so it still has some nice feelings for me. Tal darim needs to go next though....I've had it Veto'd for a year
Not really sure how I feel about condemned ridge... as a Terran, I guess it's kinda cool to have what seems like will be a Terran-favoured map, but eh...
Even the design of the map, having it shifted mirrored; makes one cross spawn a longer rush distance than the other. Just seems really wonky in terms of trying to balance, since you'll have 4 different location situations rather than just 3 normally. Blah.
On June 09 2012 22:48 kAelle_sc wrote: Why is Metalopolis out? I was hoping Tal'darim Altar would be out since Zerg has the disadvantage in getting their 3rd.
It is hugely zergfavored and has been in the pool forever
It's actually not zerg favored its favored for toss pvz, and terran tvz (unless it's cross positions that's the only position it favors zerg zvt).
Glad to see korhal gone hated zvp on that map, metal thank god was sick of that map to, new map looks dumb and is instantly being veto'd :D
Metapolis was getting really old and it was a terrible map to play as Terran. Note this was actually confirmed when David Kim released something like 70% win rates for ZvT on this map. I wasn't at all surprised, since Terran relies on defending a small choke point and walling, something nearly impossible to do cost efficiently on meta.
Glad Korhal Compound is out. That map made defending against counterattacks virtually impossible. Never had much of a problem with Metalopolis though there was absolutely no reason to ever not take the Gold as your 3rd unless you were significantly behind in Army supply.
The new map looks interesting but the 3rd looks too imbalanced. It needs to have no rocks but also needs to be more vulnerable.
Damn I just got insanely hyped staring at Desolate Fortress thinking it was a 1v1 map, wondering about how this map would screw up standard play and the really build copycats would whine about how terrible it was while it would be brain-numbingly awesome.
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season.
FREE AT LAST, FREE AT LAST! LORD ALMIGHTY WE ARE FREE AT LAST!
We hope that this "potentially tournament viable map, suitable for macro style play" is good even though the rocks are at the third making PvZ on this map like it is on Tal'darim Altar: vetoed.
See, I respect Blizzard and I think they're doing a great job with balance, and I like to think that they pay attention to how the matchups work, but then I see them put rocks at the third?
EDIT: ^^^ WELL I GUESS THERE ARE NO MORE ROCKS!!! ^___^
On June 08 2012 23:01 blade55555 wrote: That new map is awful, rofl blizzard and their destructible rocks. That is immediately going on my veto list.
I don/t think you understand, ZvP is imbalanced everywhere but Korea supposedly. So toss will get their natural and zergs will have to wait before a third.
Im glad they are focusing on tournament style maps again
The rest of the world needs to start learning how to play.
This new map is about as bad as they come. not really sure what blizz were doing here, much rather see some more ESV/community maps given a season or another map making competition help :/
I hope they fix the frame rate issues and re-introduce Metropolis LE back into the ladder. That map is awesome and it was so sweet playing it in ladder for the short bit of time it was there!
On June 09 2012 22:48 kAelle_sc wrote: Why is Metalopolis out? I was hoping Tal'darim Altar would be out since Zerg has the disadvantage in getting their 3rd.
It is hugely zergfavored and has been in the pool forever
It's actually not zerg favored its favored for toss pvz, and terran tvz (unless it's cross positions that's the only position it favors zerg zvt).
Glad to see korhal gone hated zvp on that map, metal thank god was sick of that map to, new map looks dumb and is instantly being veto'd :D
You can't be serious . . . are you talking about Metalopolis? You think that is PROTOSS favored in PvZ??? You've got to be either talking about a different map or you're just high, even the most rabid zerg fanboys would admit that Metalopolis favors Zerg ZvP. . . same way Antiga Shipyard favors Terran TvP, and Entombed favors Protoss PvZ (IMO at least, as a P player).
Metalopolis simply isn’t being used in tournaments anymore, and this map has some balance issues as well. (4)Metropolis LE is an improved version of this map that will see use in a future ladder season.
FREE AT LAST, FREE AT LAST! LORD ALMIGHTY WE ARE FREE AT LAST!
Hey now, don't say that. They've removed the map, what, three times now? And they even said that LE will "see use in a future ladder season". I think it's going to be their fallback map if their mapmaking team makes a crappy map. Most people don't really have -too- many problems with it.
No, they said METROPOLIS LE is an "improved version of METALopolis" that will "see use in a future ladder season". METALopolis is gone for good. Metropolis is it's de facto replacement, as it's a similar map only bigger and more balanced.
And most people do have huge problems with Metalopolis. Basically every Protoss player and most Terran players have Metal on veto just because of the balance issues.
On June 12 2012 10:54 Masvidal wrote: No, they said METROPOLIS LE is an "improved version of METALopolis" that will "see use in a future ladder season". METALopolis is gone for good. Metropolis is it's de facto replacement, as it's a similar map only bigger and more balanced.
And most people do have huge problems with Metalopolis. Basically every Protoss player and most Terran players have Metal on veto just because of the balance issues.
Sorry, I misread the post. But is it really that bad for P and T? I guess I was playing zerg back when the map was in the pool so I probably didn't notice as much... I always did enjoy watching games on it, though. Dunno why it's a problematic map, either.
Oh wells. I guess I just liked it because I have fond memories of nydus worming/proxying in the base fog during the beta ;_;
Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
On June 12 2012 11:17 Aenur wrote: Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
Im happy about the removed maps. Dont liked them at all. Try the new maps soon.
What i'm realy happy about is that they finaly start change the team game maps. the new maps look kinda funny. Even if Desolate Stronghold remind me a little to Discord IV.
Love 2vs2 play and hopefully this is a start to change more team maps from time to time.
Also the map changes give me the motivation to get back to SC2. D3 starts to get boring anyway
On June 12 2012 11:17 Aenur wrote: Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
That is sad. They should be abit more stubborn on this (ok sounds wierd :D). Now we have another clone map with an easy defendable third (at least in the early game). I have no doubt that the zergs will keep going with 12min 200 roach every game. I will give this map a try though, despite of having another veto cause of metalopolis - but I don't have much hope.
On June 12 2012 11:17 Aenur wrote: Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
That is sad. They should be abit more stubborn on this (ok sounds wierd :D). Now we have another clone map with an easy defendable third (at least in the early game). I have no doubt that the zergs will keep going with 12min 200 roach every game. I will give this map a try though, despite of having another veto cause of metalopolis - but I don't have much hope.
To be fair Zerg are kinda disadvantaged if they cant take that early third
That new map looks terrible, it's good that we have been moving away from 4 spawn point maps imo, and this is a step backwards with rocks on the third on top of that. Literally all the rocks do is help protoss and terran vs zerg, as the tight choke point is great for them and they will always have enough units to take down those rocks in time for a normal timing, unlike zerg vs protoss which it hurts a lot.
Having said this it does not matter so long as the map is not picked up by tournaments as zergs can veto it.
The removal of metal and korhal are good though, both are terrible maps.
On June 12 2012 21:01 Ziktomini wrote: That new map looks terrible, it's good that we have been moving away from 4 spawn point maps imo, and this is a step backwards with rocks on the third on top of that. Literally all the rocks do is help protoss and terran vs zerg, as the tight choke point is great for them and they will always have enough units to take down those rocks in time for a normal timing, unlike zerg vs protoss which it hurts a lot.
Having said this it does not matter so long as the map is not picked up by tournaments as zergs can veto it.
The removal of metal and korhal are good though, both are terrible maps.
On June 12 2012 11:17 Aenur wrote: Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
That is sad. They should be abit more stubborn on this (ok sounds wierd :D). Now we have another clone map with an easy defendable third (at least in the early game). I have no doubt that the zergs will keep going with 12min 200 roach every game. I will give this map a try though, despite of having another veto cause of metalopolis - but I don't have much hope.
To be fair Zerg are kinda disadvantaged if they cant take that early third
Not in TvZ though. If they can take a really early third they're ahead by miles. 2 Base Zerg against 2 Base Terran is not that bad (provided they have a macro hath for production ) The sad fact is 3 mining Bases is all every race need for basically a 200/200 army and tech giving those out too early for basically free without real aggresive potential is not a great idea.
2 cents: vetoing maps because you don't like them (e.g. rocks on third for zerg or metalopolis for protoss) is a bad idea unless you only plan on playing ladder, because you never know when a tournament will have the map you hate in their map pool and if you don't have experience playing on it it might as well be an auto loss for you.
On June 12 2012 11:17 Aenur wrote: Why are so many zerg whining about the rocks? Just put your third besides the rocks and after you have destroyed them it turns to a macro hatch (overall it works like kind of a half base until the rocks are removed). Learn to adapt that you cannot play full 3 bases early on - every time on any map. I think Blizzard should disable the downvote option for new introduced maps, at least for the first half of the season.
I've updated the OP with the new info, if there's a new map overview image I'll also replace the old one with the new one so people cba to read the OP know there's no rocks at the third anymore.
On June 12 2012 23:49 Immer[Forever] wrote: That 2v2 map was really bad in my oppinion. It was too camp friendly so the games were pretty boring.
Keep in mind we only had Twilight Fortress for a short while during the infancy of SC2. Overall strategy, macro, and micro were pretty poor, so people tended to do huge turtle->timings. I always thought it was a great map. One of, if not THE, only good map in the 2v2 pool. I remember my jaw dropping when I read some Blizzard doofus' reason for it being removed... (will quote when I find it).
The new map pool looks really awesome, but I hope blizzard considers making antiga a forced cross spawn map. I don't really understand why this isn't implemented, and also considering the current pool I'm worried that antiga might become one of the most popular vetos on ladder + maybe removed in upcoming seasons due to lack of play. It's really quite a good map imo, but only on cross spawns. Like cmon, tournaments are using only cross version.. why cant ladder do this too??
They map they added is kinda odd with the third. I feel like it will end being a veto map for zerg and protoss, but a strong terran map because we can use PF and siege tanks to secure spots. Or we will get a lot of 2 base timing.
Haven't had the chance to play on the new map yet. Not too sure how I feel about Metalo being removed. I did have my fair share of recieving some nasty 1 base all-ins, but it has been in the map pool since the beginning. Guess I'm a little sad to see it go.
I really liked Korhal Compound. The new map play like Shakuras in the early game, but is bigger and has additional cliffs/air spaces and the mid is much more divided with easier accessible expansions. Seems like an ok map. I love the desert look of it. Reminds me of good old Desert Oasis.
On June 14 2012 02:29 covetousrat wrote: Can any1 answer me? Is Condemned Ridge like Shakuras where players can spawn only left or right? or any where of the 4 spawns?
All spawns should be possible.
But its really not an issue since this is probably the biggest map in the pool since Taldarim.
The ridge behind the 3rd could make for interesting proxies in games involving Protoss... PvP: pylon on highground, 2 gates on lowground. TvP: Build proxy rax(es) on highground, float to lowground.
But these should be mitigated by the multiple possible spawn locations. Unless you're playing a certain semi-pro.
But I have a question...is there an alternative to the neutral depot to prevent the 3pylon block and bunker-block shenanigans? As a Protoss using a FFE, the neutral depot can create big problems in walling off defensively during an all-in.
On June 14 2012 02:29 covetousrat wrote: Can any1 answer me? Is Condemned Ridge like Shakuras where players can spawn only left or right? or any where of the 4 spawns?
All spawns should be possible.
But its really not an issue since this is probably the biggest map in the pool since Taldarim.
I liked Korhal so I'm kinda sad to see it gone but I'm really looking forward to Metropolis being back sometime. It doesn't look like it's back this season but hopefully it will be for Season 9. Love that map.
Not sure how I feel about Condemned Ridge yet since I think the ridge behind the third allows for interesting play (for better or for worse) but it almost seems like it's too big.
I like the removals. Metal was really bad versus zerg and Korhal just lent itself to 2 base allins. It was a fun map to practice allins but got boring after a while.
I really don't like condemned ridge though. The third seems way too wide to properly defend a roach max with immortal/sentry and the ramp is really wide. The ridge behind the third I haven't had experience with but it seems like Terran could abuse that with drops really easily.
I vetoed it just based on the wideness of the third, though.
At face value, Condemmned Ridge looks very very good. So far, I like it. Thank goodness they got rid of the rocks.
However, if there's one thing I don't like is it's odd design. There's so much dead space in the middle and on the outside, and to be honest this map is SO potent for drops.
I don't see why any Terran would want to veto this.
On June 14 2012 08:26 HeroMystic wrote: At face value, Condemmned Ridge looks very very good. So far, I like it. Thank goodness they got rid of the rocks.
However, if there's one thing I don't like is it's odd design. There's so much dead space in the middle and on the outside, and to be honest this map is SO potent for drops.
I don't see why any Terran would want to veto this.
As a noob terran I can't see any place to attack versus zergs, all is so open!
So... what's the general consensus on Condemned Ridge as Zerg? Haven't had the chance to play on it yet even though it's not thumbed down (just bad luck I guess).
On June 14 2012 08:26 HeroMystic wrote: At face value, Condemmned Ridge looks very very good. So far, I like it. Thank goodness they got rid of the rocks.
However, if there's one thing I don't like is it's odd design. There's so much dead space in the middle and on the outside, and to be honest this map is SO potent for drops.
I don't see why any Terran would want to veto this.
I'm Terran and I vetoed it because cross spawns is...unplayable.
This map is soooooooooooo huge ! I can 14 CC in every match up without any fear now ! Even photon rush is hard to do if you don't scout the enneny directly !
Really like this map , I made an epic split against a zerg while he was attacking my third ! It's so wide open , I love it !
Condemned ridge is interesting. It's pretty fucking good for mech.
I also like how all the spawn positions work pretty well. I also noticed how it's not rotationally symmetric. There's the close by air style, the super long cross style, and the vertical style that works pretty well.
I just noticed metal was removed. Just noticed I haven't played on it all season ;; oh well.
On June 08 2012 22:56 Sphen5117 wrote: My biggest critique: The HUGE amount of dead airspace behind bases is stupid. It's a design flaw on any map in my opinion, as it lets an harasser whether it be with mutas, medvacs, or prisms, just fucking let it set out there in the corner afk until they need it. It's single-player campaign level shit. It makes "base defense" a matter of just "Don't fucking leave cause the instant you do he's just gonna grab that fucking afk medvac sitting there with its thumb up its ass (or mutas, etc), and rape your base."
Blizzard is balancing multiplayer around crap like this as well as tanks around steppes of war. Hope is waning I fear.
EPT![[image loading]](http://eu.media5.battle.net/cms/gallery/R5ISU196TZB01339085982546.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://eu.media4.battle.net/cms/gallery/0JP4TU6ARKAF1339086314268.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://eu.media4.battle.net/cms/gallery/HZCMMXBWLGY11339085982883.jpg)
.
![[image loading]](http://i47.tinypic.com/e9gi1v.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uALFy.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/e/e4/Twilight_Fortress.jpg)
