EPTSeason 9 maps:What should be removed/added - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CamoPillbox
Czech Republic229 Posts
| ||
Gullis
Sweden740 Posts
I wouldnt mind switching out ohana and daybreak just because Ohana is imo a boring map and daybreak mostly produces borings games... so I really only like cloud  | ||
|
KJSharp
United States84 Posts
There seems to be this overwhelming feeling in the community that all games should be "no rush 10 minutes," and that maps should be gigantic to accommodate this style of play. We label every 1 base strategy cheese, and I hear commentators all the time give implicit praise to players for making the "conservative defensive choice," instead of the super aggressive all in choice, even when players are on 2 or 3 bases. You see this prejudice all the time, and I simply don't understand it. Whirlwind, Tal Darim, Metropolis, Terminus, and Atlantis Spaceship are all maps that are simply too big to be 1v1 maps. 1v1 maps should be sized anywhere from Lost Temple to Antiga Shipyard. Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Shakuras Plateau are ideally sized maps. | ||
|
yeastiality
Canada374 Posts
On September 17 2012 01:31 KJSharp wrote: I don't understand many people's motivations behind wanting to replace Tal Darim Altar with Metropolis. I suppose we want to remove a map that is simply too big to be a 1v1 map but has many features to make it balanced (rocks at third, seigeable natural, no main base ramp to make 1 basing viable), and replace it with a map that is also way too big to be a 1v1 map but lacks the features needed to make it balanced for Terran. I have had Tal Darim vetoed for all but the first season because I could never beat zerg and, more innocently, because I was repulsed by the sheer size of the map. It is much better than Metropolis though, both aesthetically and for gameplay. Metropolis is just a huge boring map that encourages players to sit on their ass for 15 minutes, and favors Zerg excessively and Protoss moderately over Terran. There seems to be this overwhelming feeling in the community that all games should be "no rush 10 minutes," and that maps should be gigantic to accommodate this style of play. We label every 1 base strategy cheese, and I hear commentators all the time give implicit praise to players for making the "conservative defensive choice," instead of the super aggressive all in choice, even when players are on 2 or 3 bases. You see this prejudice all the time, and I simply don't understand it. Whirlwind, Tal Darim, Metropolis, Terminus, and Atlantis Spaceship are all maps that are simply too big to be 1v1 maps. 1v1 maps should be sized anywhere from Lost Temple to Antiga Shipyard. Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Shakuras Plateau are ideally sized maps. It's because the other 2 races can't pull half their workers at a random time and make the other player work 10 times as hard to defend. If that part of Terran wasn't broken as hell because of mules, all the races could conceivably want the same map features. It's more of a survival mechanism than a prejudice. If you could siege the natural on metropolis from some silly location, would you like the map? | ||
|
KJSharp
United States84 Posts
On September 17 2012 01:36 yeastiality wrote: It's because the other 2 races can't pull half their workers at a random time and make the other player work 10 times as hard to defend. If that part of Terran wasn't broken as hell because of mules, all the races could conceivably want the same map features. It's more of a survival mechanism than a prejudice. If you could siege the natural on metropolis from some silly location, would you like the map? Work 10 times as hard? You mean like blindly building queens? Anyway, it should be obvious from my post that I wouldn't like metropolis even if I could seige the natural. Learn to read. I said 1) I didn't like Tal Darim because it was too big and 2) I've had Tal Darim vetoed since the end of Season 1. | ||
|
MrF
United States320 Posts
As to KJSharps question I think most people just believe that there is less skill involved in pulling of a 1 bass strategy than there is in playing a longer macro oriented game with map controll, scouting, harass and harass defence and i agree. I also think that its the general direction that the game is taking so the maps should reflect that change in meta. Its not like you cant pull of one base play on larger maps it just takes more effort. The fact is TDA is the one map that doesn't have a ramp to the main and most people think that is a bad feature to leave out. If you watched or played early SC2 games it was all one base play and it gets dull after a while, granted we are talking about the ladder here and not tournaments but i think that the ladder metagame reflects pro play in a lot of ways. Its not really a prejudice as much as a preference. | ||
|
DontNerfInfestors
Spain280 Posts
Blizz thinks TDA is perfected but it has been only fixed in one of the 4 things that are broken. | ||
|
whatevername
471 Posts
On September 17 2012 01:56 KJSharp wrote: I want Tal Darim gone cause its kind of a boring map to me. But metropolis would be even worse for the reasons you listed. I agree, the maps are getting a little absurd. Its fine to have maybe one or two that are very big, but I should expect a good amount of variance. If one map makes it easy to expand another should make it a bit hard.Work 10 times as hard? You mean like blindly building queens? Anyway, it should be obvious from my post that I wouldn't like metropolis even if I could seige the natural. Learn to read. I said 1) I didn't like Tal Darim because it was too big and 2) I've had Tal Darim vetoed since the end of Season 1. | ||
|
nrv
United States113 Posts
It just feels really old and stale. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
Inside.Out
Canada569 Posts
| ||
| ||
