|
On September 01 2012 01:13 c0sm0naut wrote:
I cannot believe TDA is voted that poorly. Really no one likes this map?
ive been an RTS player for a long time and TDA has a lot of good elements about it that make it different than other macro maps
1. natural expo is difficult to hold vs tank pushes, warpgate all ins and speedling aggression in the early game. unlike most maps, TDA has a difficult to secure early first expansion (unless your opponent is standard). this map and antiga are probably the only maps where you will consistently see high masters/gm zergs getting ling speed before their 3rd hatch 9/10 times. antiga is generally hated (for good reason) because 4th bases are difficult to take on that map. however, with tal darim, despite it's "friendliness" to early aggression, macro games are very playable. in a split map scenario this is one of the most epic maps you can possibly play on. in order to take base 4, 5, 6, and 7, you must control at least two watchtowers vs good players. if youre terran this means scattering bunkers/turrets around this area and turreting up your main.
2. this map consistently produces the best terran vs terran games. not only do most games start with gasfirst or 13g aggression (koreans have historically take gas on taldarim very quickly) , there is viability in early game tank pushes that are NOT all in. so you can go up, siege their geyser, kill it, then retreat and have a small gas lead. After the early game stages, 4 watchtowers must be controlled. there is not THAT much area to cover with turrets, which is a very nice thing about the main base on this map. in the mid game, this map has enough room for every terran style to be viable. i'm sure you mechfags out there hate this map, but if you're playing mech on tal darim or antiga youre doing it wrong. tank lines are VERY hard to set up on this map. there is constnat opportunity for counter attacking and harassment, as well as maneuvering. you can send a drop out, then break the side of his tank line on the weakside. on tal darim there is enough room for this. compared to a "modern" macro map like daybreak or cloud kingdom, these opportunities just don't exist because sieging positions are simply too strong.
3. my final point is that if siege tank/collosus/fungal positions are too strong they lead to very very rapid teching. this is why in TvT nowadays on daybreak it tends to go into the "turtly" phase of tvt wheree players kill off of them marine, and eventually their siege tanks for raven, viking ,battle cruiser and thor. these maps where defensive positions are 10x stronger than offensive ones lead to the death of muta builds, the death of hyper aggressive builds (multi dropping, flanking, etc)and we hvae seen that develop over time as the map pool changes and players get better at defending
my question to the TL community:
- the reason the rocks were at the third in the first place is a convoluted one. the map maker originally did not have destructible rocks (ty dustin) but felt that the first two expansions were too easily defensible for protoss and terran. so, in order to balance this, he took off geyser 6 and i believe 2 mineral patches from the 3rd base. in the blzzard version the rocks have been added and it is as full base. Would you hate this map less if it wasn't rocks at the third? what if it was a 1gas 6 min 3rd base?
this is my fave map and if it goes i will cry cry cry
If someone would modify TDA to make a normal ramp, no rocks on third and forced cross spawn only, the map would be completely fine with everyone.
|
At this point in the metagame, I think it would be fine to just remove the rocks from TDA and leave it at 8m2g. If they keep the map, I would like to see them raise the main up one level for PvP and remove the rocks.
|
ty for your responses. i just think its a great map. it's iconic. it truly did change the meta of this game. when it came out it was just sooooo big compared to everything. remember jjakji vs leenock with jjakji's hidden behind the minerals? leenock goes double spire, the first double spire build in gsl so far. that doesn't happen on a daybreak kind of map. these gargantuan 4p maps are really lacking except for condemned ridge, which is pretty much a horible map in general.
|
On September 01 2012 01:13 c0sm0naut wrote:
I cannot believe TDA is voted that poorly. Really no one likes this map?
ive been an RTS player for a long time and TDA has a lot of good elements about it that make it different than other macro maps
1. natural expo is difficult to hold vs tank pushes, warpgate all ins and speedling aggression in the early game. unlike most maps, TDA has a difficult to secure early first expansion (unless your opponent is standard). this map and antiga are probably the only maps where you will consistently see high masters/gm zergs getting ling speed before their 3rd hatch 9/10 times. antiga is generally hated (for good reason) because 4th bases are difficult to take on that map. however, with tal darim, despite it's "friendliness" to early aggression, macro games are very playable. in a split map scenario this is one of the most epic maps you can possibly play on. in order to take base 4, 5, 6, and 7, you must control at least two watchtowers vs good players. if youre terran this means scattering bunkers/turrets around this area and turreting up your main.
2. this map consistently produces the best terran vs terran games. not only do most games start with gasfirst or 13g aggression (koreans have historically take gas on taldarim very quickly) , there is viability in early game tank pushes that are NOT all in. so you can go up, siege their geyser, kill it, then retreat and have a small gas lead. After the early game stages, 4 watchtowers must be controlled. there is not THAT much area to cover with turrets, which is a very nice thing about the main base on this map. in the mid game, this map has enough room for every terran style to be viable. i'm sure you mechfags out there hate this map, but if you're playing mech on tal darim or antiga youre doing it wrong. tank lines are VERY hard to set up on this map. there is constnat opportunity for counter attacking and harassment, as well as maneuvering. you can send a drop out, then break the side of his tank line on the weakside. on tal darim there is enough room for this. compared to a "modern" macro map like daybreak or cloud kingdom, these opportunities just don't exist because sieging positions are simply too strong.
3. my final point is that if siege tank/collosus/fungal positions are too strong they lead to very very rapid teching. this is why in TvT nowadays on daybreak it tends to go into the "turtly" phase of tvt wheree players kill off of them marine, and eventually their siege tanks for raven, viking ,battle cruiser and thor. these maps where defensive positions are 10x stronger than offensive ones lead to the death of muta builds, the death of hyper aggressive builds (multi dropping, flanking, etc)and we hvae seen that develop over time as the map pool changes and players get better at defending
my question to the TL community:
- the reason the rocks were at the third in the first place is a convoluted one. the map maker originally did not have destructible rocks (ty dustin) but felt that the first two expansions were too easily defensible for protoss and terran. so, in order to balance this, he took off geyser 6 and i believe 2 mineral patches from the 3rd base. in the blzzard version the rocks have been added and it is as full base. Would you hate this map less if it wasn't rocks at the third? what if it was a 1gas 6 min 3rd base?
this is my fave map and if it goes i will cry cry cry
TDA is currently suckish,it has to be fused into a 2 player map and 3rd rocks removed,made a little smaller,and change watchtower position to the central.Then make the ramp normal and we have a super TDA that everybody would like
|
If someone would modify TDA to make a normal ramp, no rocks on third and forced cross spawn only, the map would be completely fine with everyone.
By everyone, you mean Zerg players. I guess you're right. That is everyone these days.
|
Taldarim is just bad. There's not even a ramp at the main; I hope it gets scrapped.
|
Oh my god, maybe it's because I'm terran but I hope to god they don't add in Metropolis. I don't feel like playing no-rush 50min games everytime i draw that map.
I don't understand why everyone wants EVERY map to be a colossal map. Why do can't we have more maps like Ohana? It's nice and small but not as bad as in the beginning of the game (i.e. steppes of war etc)
Honestly what I think we need is just a bigger pool in general. And I mean like 8 two player maps similar in size to Ohana and CK and 8 big 4 player maps like metropolis and Entombed and stuff.
We'd get more veto's obviously but I think a bigger map pool overall would help lessen the monotony of ladder. And it can get pretty monotonous.
|
8 maps 3 vetoes feels perfect for me.
|
my only issue is that prime/crux maps are gsl commissioned and so are given preference to their use in the gsl, and thusly are given preference in other tournaments and even the standard ladder ... not that they are bad maps, there are a few bad eggs (calm b4 storm, metro)
but there are many other amazing maps on the scene from other mappers that see little interest from the community just because they dont see them in tournaments. heck, even esv runs a rotation of their maps in their esv tournaments but the majority of users here will have no clue about most of them
and probably the most worst thing of all is that blizzard will probably introduce a whole new set of garbage maps for hots and force us to play them on ladder. you know, to "show off" the new features of hots. meh.
|
This is why the game is boring. Every zerg wants a macro map. They want to be able to drone up to 80 without any effort and than go BL/infestor/ling. BW was great because Zergs didn't need 3 mining bases to play. How many times did u see in BW a zerg wait til 200/200 to finally move out??
Smaller maps are better because it doesn't allow every race to double expo and sit til max armies than 1 battle GG. Every game now seems like it's 3 bases vs 3 bases 200/200. No one wants to watch those games.
|
On September 01 2012 04:19 tranmillitary wrote:
This is why the game is boring. Every zerg wants a macro map. They want to be able to drone up to 80 without any effort and than go BL/infestor/ling. BW was great because Zergs didn't need 3 mining bases to play. How many times did u see in BW a zerg wait til 200/200 to finally move out??
Smaller maps are better because it doesn't allow every race to double expo and sit til max armies than 1 battle GG. Every game now seems like it's 3 bases vs 3 bases 200/200. No one wants to watch those games.
Wait what. You really don't understand how starcraft works if you don't think zergs needed 3 mining bases to play. (zvp vs forge FE EVERY zerg went 3 hatch 3 base unless they were doing a 2 base all in). Zvt if zerg didn't get a third at normal timing you lost. Tvz in bw was terran trying to deny third if possible and if they could they won. Just like in sc2, if zerg can't get a third base then terran/toss would win unless the zerg won with an all in.
Smaller maps make games end faster... It's one battle then GG. Jesus this post you made in general is wrong on so many levels.
|
Antiga and Tal'Darim are two of the best maps in the pool so here's to hoping they stick around. Seriously the hate they get is undeserved.
|
On September 01 2012 04:19 tranmillitary wrote:
This is why the game is boring. Every zerg wants a macro map. They want to be able to drone up to 80 without any effort and than go BL/infestor/ling. BW was great because Zergs didn't need 3 mining bases to play. How many times did u see in BW a zerg wait til 200/200 to finally move out??
Smaller maps are better because it doesn't allow every race to double expo and sit til max armies than 1 battle GG. Every game now seems like it's 3 bases vs 3 bases 200/200. No one wants to watch those games.
Sir thirds were and will always be needed by zerg cause they rely so heavily on them based on how the mechanics of the race work. Without a third in both BW and SC2 the zerg dies with immense ease unless it's some early game all in or cheese so unless that's what you mean and want you're wrong. An if that's actually the case you need to find a new game haha.
|
On September 01 2012 04:24 Catatonic wrote:
Antiga and Tal'Darim are two of the best maps in the pool so here's to hoping they stick around. Seriously the hate they get is undeserved.
The problem with Tal'Darim is PvP 4gate warfare, no ramp at main/huge ramp at natural, 3rd base has browder's boulders, also it's older than shit, "balanced" as in 50/50 for all matchups, but forces out long drawn out uninspired gameplays.
Antiga just has 1 main attack path, and if it's not cross spawn, there's asymmetric imbalance due to different attack distance by ground/air, also 4th is nearly impossible to take unless you hold the middle, and middle is really hard to break due to high ground + vision tower that covers essentially everything.
I just want Blizzard to try more community map pools 
|
Hopefully they won't add Metropolis. I really hate these stalemate situations on that map...also I think because you can defend on that map ridiculously good it really favors terran in TvZ, because they can relatively easy get up to a very defensive situation and tech up to skyterran which is hands down pretty much not beatable.
|
United Kingdom31935 Posts
I just want some new maps to have som diverstiy as long as they are fun to play 
|
Remove Tal'Darim.
Remove close spawns for Entombed.
Make Antiga cross spawn only.
|
Don't see why people want Metropolis. That map pretty much kills the " in between " play you can do so you are not all in but also not super eco.
Is designed for super eco builds but since its the damn ladder you won't have pros playing on it so it will also have a good vibe for all in build if its added to the ladder.
TDA has basically the same problem as Metro for an "average" player, setting up in the early/mid games is hard due to the strange ramps, lot of dropping areas and rocks at third to top that off.
Its a great map if you reach late game but it basically goes on the principle of " Walk this thin edge between not being all ined and being greedy enough so you can enter the late game on a huge map like this".
The only difference i see is that on Metro you will be struggling to play super economically rather than on TDA where you struggle to play standard.
In my honest opinion the ladder needs more maps like Daybreak but maybe with the remove element that zerg has instant win on the map, except for the 3rd being position in the perfect spot for zerg that map has everything.
Taking the 3rd expo is a question of having enough units to defend in a position worse than the one at your natural, it isn't like entombed where taking a 3rd can mean better defensive position nor is it like antiga where taking a 3rd suddenly means that you have to defend 2 drop routes in complete opposite sides of your "territory" and you go from a "medium ramp" to "open field" with your army.
Taking 4th/5th whoever is quite easy and for a split map scenario there are 3 wide open paths + 2 drop routes.
Thus you can be relatively aggressive but not overly aggressive.
If it just had that 3rd base ether further away from the main, closer to the main it would be perfect example of a very good map for platinum to master players, as it stands that 3rd is placed in a position that is way to good for zerg but even still its what id call a good ladder map.
|
Honestly, I like Condemned Ridge. Its a total different style of play, something different. Granted, its a huge map, but I like seeing new and different maps; instead of the same old but with different title-sets.
|
On August 31 2012 19:44 Adonminus wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2012 19:37 imPermanenCe wrote:On August 31 2012 19:32 AnomalySC2 wrote:
Add a smaller sized map that allows players to fight earlier in the game WHILE going into a macro game. These massive, no rush 50 minutes sized maps are boring. Daybreak is such a map. On August 31 2012 19:35 Adonminus wrote:
Tal'darim altar and shakuras plateau are very old and outdated maps. I'm expecting to have metropolis back because blizzard promised to return it in a future season. Metalopolis you mean? Metropolis dude: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Metropolis
Yes, he is confusing metropolis for metalopolis "have metropolis back", whereas metro is in the pool right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
