The map pool for the upcoming season of GSL has been announced. Ohana has been removed and replaced with a brand new map, Bel'Shir Vestige (벨시르 잔재) by Crux_EastWindy. The map pool change will occur starting from Code S Round of 32.
2012 GSL Season 5 Map Pool (listed in order as specified in announcement) GSL Whirlwind GSL Cloud Kingdom GSL Entombed Valley GSL Antiga Shipyard GSL Daybreak GSL Abyssal City GSL Bel'Shir Vestige
New map: GSL Bel'Shir Vestige, by Crux_EastWindy
2 Player Map Tileset: Bel'Shir (Jungle) Size: 124×144 Starting locations at 5 and 11 o'clock All expansions 8m 2g except for the central two expansions which are 5m 1g (standard yield)
Description (Translation from the announcement): Bel'Shir Vestige has main paths located on the two central hills with a faster road available through the center when the destructible rocks are destroyed. As the game progresses the Xel'Naga watch towers see increased usage so it is expected that engagements will occur focused on control of the center of the map, but as there are detours available one cannot become complacent even with such control. Battles in the center of the map between main armies as well as multi-pronged attacks through the detours can be expected from this map.
That map seems really interesting, and the fact that the both low min / gas expos are in the middle, gives a bit more dynamic into the game, hope this map goes well
Fuck yeah, ohana is gone. Pretty map, godawfully boring games. Still no muspelheim though T_T New map looks very interesting, to say the least! This oughta shake things up.
On October 23 2012 21:26 NightOfTheDead wrote: How more longer Antiga will stay in the map pool. Games are boring on Antiga.
Disagreed, cross position Antiga is one of the better maps in the pool because it allows for more aggressive play. Broodlords also don't work as well on antiga as on other maps, which is good as well.
I'm not so sure about the middle rocks/XN towers position of Vestige. It came more natural at daybreak. This highground towers together with the fact that it seems like an up vs down situation there in contrast to the left/right on Daybreak make me wonder if this feature will be successful.
On October 23 2012 21:26 NightOfTheDead wrote: How more longer Antiga will stay in the map pool. Games are boring on Antiga.
Disagreed, cross position Antiga is one of the better maps in the pool because it allows for more aggressive play. Broodlords also don't work as well on antiga as on other maps, which is good as well.
True, but it also means the same old 3 base center control winning the game if the game goes longer.
Edit: Hang on, does anyone see this as Daybreak, except the spawns have been swapped with bottom left to top left, and top right to bottom right? Its like the whole map has been rotated 90 degrees.
Rocks in the middle, xelnaga giving sight of the rocks, a pocket 3rd just outside the nat, a 3rd long the side, a 4th further down from the 3rd, etc etc
Edit2: for those who think one line answers are always off the cuff
On October 23 2012 21:30 Arachne wrote: I don't think Toss can beat a zerg on this map
Edit: Hang on, does anyone see this as Daybreak, except the spawns have been swapped with bottom left to top left, and top right to bottom right? Its like the whole map has been rotated 90 degrees.
Rocks in the middle, xelnaga giving sight of the rocks, a pocket 3rd just outside the nat, a 3rd long the side, a 4th further down from the 3rd, etc etc
1. See a map for the first time 2. Making sweeping generalization
Excellent!
Map looks great and the pool is fantastic overall. I am a Z and I hate Antiga but I know it can create some interesting games -- not every map needs to favor us.
See map 1st time, Look at map, look at ramps, see multiple large access points to where protoss's 3rd can be, analyze likelihood of toss making mutiple 4 gateway walls, cross reference with the distance of the natural's minerals to the main's minerals to the likely location of the 3rd, and the distance to those mineral's, predict Muta from zerg most games vs toss, see toss scrambling to hold muta play, leaving two base timings as the stronger option, realize that toss 2 base timings have been mostly figured out, even the dreaded 2 base sentry immo push,
On October 23 2012 21:11 pencil_ethics wrote: All expansions 8m 2g except for the central two expansions which appear to be 6m 1g (assumed to be high yield; verification requested from those who have an account on KR since the original map post states that they are 8m 2g which is clearly wrong from the picture)
On October 23 2012 21:11 pencil_ethics wrote: All expansions 8m 2g except for the central two expansions which appear to be 6m 1g (assumed to be high yield; verification requested from those who have an account on KR since the original map post states that they are 8m 2g which is clearly wrong from the picture)
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
antiga and daybreak need to go imo. entombed and CK are cutting it kinda fine too. at least reskin them or something haha.
i want lost temple! i wonder how that would play out with today's meta
Anyone got recent GSL states on the map pool (e.g. last 2 seasons). Would be nice to see whether they have decided to remove Ohana for balance reasons, or other reasons.
(I know general stats are available on TLPD, but I assume GSL prefers their own numbers quite highly, and I'm at work so I can't do all the filtering and stuff to check through myself atm).
They can't remove Antiga and Entombed as long as other new fair terran maps won't be introduced. I don't know if you noticed but all new maps since Daybreak are still made with the "poor zerg, need to help them with our maps" mindset. And all GSL maps since Daybreak have a 55+ winrate for Z in TvZ (55 is ok, 60 is not, but at least they removed the 2 70% Z maps, yeh).
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
While Ohana is so much better then Antiga and the rest, it is a map from the community, not from Blizzard or the map team of the GSL, therefore (I assume) it is less valuable to the GSL managers who want to please Blizzard, sadly.
EDIT: about the actual map, I think it is a rather low quality map that does not fit the current metagame, even though I do prefer new bad maps then no new maps at all.
I guess on Ohana the two-base immortal/sentry push was just a tad too strong. I'll miss it though, I liked Ohana. New map looks interesting, I think though that BL+infestor will be a nightmare to face there, with all the cliffs.
Ohana is easily the 2nd best map behind Cloud Kingdom (whining Zergs used to winning based on map imbalances aside), it's upsetting to see that Ohana was removed - it feels like GSL is trying to eliminate any 2p maps on the smaller end of the spectrum, so that maps are either freakishly huge, or have more than one possible spawn location for your opponent, I guess to discourage short games resulting from all-ins. Losing Ohana is a really sad side effect of this though, as it is on the more balanced end of the spectrum when it comes to maps that help Terran and Protoss hold their own against Zerg.
I feel like in the future, the game is going to have to actually be balanced by the maps because of the way one race has finally sort of emerged as having a definitive edge over the other two and even being "dominant" in one phase of the game. That being said, I wonder what mapmakers are going to be able to do to help people combat lategame armies based on slow moving air units and ground-based spellcasters? Does GSL think larger, more wide-open maps will help more mobile armies out-maneuver the slower "invincible" armies lategame and win by harassment and splitting or something? I know they see the same trend in their own league as is occurring in every other league, and traditionally maps have been the way to "macguyver" the more serious balance issues in lieu of a patch, but I'm not sure what the game-plan really is here.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
I would rather see them remove Entombed Valley and/or Abyssal City rather than Ohana.. But the new map looks very interesting, and can't wait to try it out!
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
we need a jessica reskin of the map, so MMA can nuke daybreak all day long
On October 23 2012 21:42 Sinedd wrote: SC2 seriously needs more map circulation..
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
Yeah, we need more different maps. It's even worse in the ladder where we still got Shakuras and Taldarim. We should get new maps more often. Especially Blizzard should be more open with switching maps and trying out a lot of community-made maps because they can get the most balance data and they can easily remove a map after 2 month if it is imbalanced.
About this map: It looks like it makes for more dynamic gameplay than Ohana at least but it also looks like a huge map once again. Team Crux really hates small maps it seems. Well, until we got this map on EU server I can't say much about how it really plays out.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
Do they move armies up and down cliffs, and gather resources in CS and dota from a fixed location?
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
those games are not starcraft, we had new maps every year/season in brood war and it contributed to the advancement of the game. daybreak is not suitable for today's metagame ( especially PvZ )
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
we need a jessica reskin of the map, so MMA can nuke daybreak all day long
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
we need a jessica reskin of the map, so MMA can nuke daybreak all day long
On October 23 2012 21:42 Sinedd wrote: SC2 seriously needs more map circulation..
and bigger maps..
lol, really? maps are getting huge already
I dont think you know what should be called a HUGE map..
just check out BW ones
Different game, different results. Bigger is not always better.
I'd take more than one new map any day, but I guess one is still better than none.
Tournament map pools need refreshment dearly, at least GSL is doing something in small steps, compared to any other event organizer they're still miles ahead, unfortunately.
On October 23 2012 21:51 Fragile51 wrote: Oh shit, i just realised...it kinda looks like a completely reworked version of Bel'shir beach. That's pretty cool.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
It would be very interesting to have a map with different mineral/gas per base distributions, but I suppose that such a thing would be too experimental to play competitive games on it.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
On October 23 2012 21:51 Fragile51 wrote: Oh shit, i just realised...it kinda looks like a completely reworked version of Bel'shir beach. That's pretty cool.
it looks more like ohana to me, hrm
It has 2 attack paths and kind of the same shape, but with way different expansion locations and high/low ground distributions. Looks very interesting imo.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
Why on earth would you remove ohana? Its one of the best maps currently played :S Why is antiga still in the pool too? That map is so bad :/ I dont understand some of these changes
Can anyone give any clue how does GSL choose which map to implement? How do they test their new map before using them? It seems to me weird that they did not run new maps in GSTL first...
First impression, favor air unit (huge air space behind space). Promote drop plays, muta, warp prism. The landscape is pretty good for Broodlords and tanks, not especially colossus favor. Scattered high templar play on here seems pretty viable. Are those rocks at the natural entrance? trying to revive void ray plays = =?
I do hope more people experience around further third though, the third looks very close to the natural to me.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
we need a jessica reskin of the map, so MMA can nuke daybreak all day long
On October 23 2012 21:42 Sinedd wrote: SC2 seriously needs more map circulation..
and bigger maps..
lol, really? maps are getting huge already
I dont think you know what should be called a HUGE map..
just check out BW ones
Different game, different results. Bigger is not always better.
On October 23 2012 22:01 GreenMash wrote: Why on earth would you remove ohana? Its one of the best maps currently played :S Why is antiga still in the pool too? That map is so bad :/ I dont understand some of these changes
Would you mind explaining why do you think Antiga is bad?
I like the new map. I would love it if there would be a completely new map pool though. That way we could see the strategies evolve on each map throughout the season which would be much more entertaining from a spectator point of view
On October 23 2012 22:01 GreenMash wrote: Why on earth would you remove ohana? Its one of the best maps currently played :S Why is antiga still in the pool too? That map is so bad :/ I dont understand some of these changes
Would you mind explaining why do you think Antiga is bad?
The fourth base is rather hard to take and keep safe.
On October 23 2012 21:11 pencil_ethics wrote: All expansions 8m 2g except for the central two expansions which appear to be 6m 1g (assumed to be high yield; verification requested from those who have an account on KR since the original map post states that they are 8m 2g which is clearly wrong from the picture)
On October 23 2012 22:04 ReachTheSky wrote: I like the new map. I would love it if there would be a completely new map pool though. That way we could see the strategies evolve on each map throughout the season which would be much more entertaining from a spectator point of view
Problem is that it is quite hard to ensure that many maps are balanced each season. Especially with this season starting right away, there is no time for the players to figure things out.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
Antiga is the most balanced ZvT map cross positions in the current mappool, zergs being butthurt over it need to grow a spine and maybe try something different then bludlud impestor every game. Ohana is way way way worse then antiga.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
Funny thing is, statistically in PvZ it's quite Zerg favoured, I guess because it's near impossible to get a 4th for protoss too and then fight infestor brood on 3 base is too difficult. Hell, even TvZ is relatively balance 52.6% in Korea, 49.3% international.
Ohana, however, is a statistical clusterfuck. edit:derp.
On October 23 2012 22:04 ReachTheSky wrote: I like the new map. I would love it if there would be a completely new map pool though. That way we could see the strategies evolve on each map throughout the season which would be much more entertaining from a spectator point of view
Problem is that it is quite hard to ensure that many maps are balanced each season. Especially with this season starting right away, there is no time for the players to figure things out.
This exactly. I always thought that there should be 4 GSL seasons per year, not 5 or 6. That way we could have a slightly drawn out schedule plus an off season, allowing to really figure out new maps and prepare some hidden strats. Would give more meaning to each championship title as well.
Whoever thinks we need even bigger maps in SC2 is killing eSports! Jokes aside, bigger maps are actually becoming boring and repetitive as far as the meta game goes. They tend towards too much macro and not enough early aggression. The best kinds of maps allow both early aggression and macro to happen, and the best games have always been the ones where action picks up early, but both players are so evenly matched that one can kill the other, and they macro up behind non-stop aggression.
Well, you just don't see that on bigger maps, its too hard to start early aggression and way too difficult to keep it going.
As for the new map, it looks very reminiscent of Daybreak. There is quite a distance from nat to 3rd, but that is offset by the large rush distance, which is made even longer by the rocks in the middle. There is sort of a half base in the middle as well. The big difference between DB and this one though is that, you seem to have many more attack paths, and taking the middle expo actually doesn't grant 100% safety and zone control for your side of the map as the half base on DB does.
I'm looking forward to seeing how games will work on the map, I've already made my mind up that it will look quite similar to Daybreak, but once the 4th and 5th bases are taken it should start deviating in interesting ways.
Lastly, they can remove CK and Daybreak only once they remove all the lesser maps as well. In order of maps that should be removed it is Whirlwind, Entombed, Antiga, CK, Daybreak. I personally prefer to see an old but great map in the tournament, rather then a new but mediocre one. For better or for worst, Antiga and Entombed have survived the test of time and provided us with great and memorable games, as well as not being statistically too favorable for any once race.
Sure Antiga has the problem of you having to fight for a 4th, and Entombed has the problem of giving you a easy 3rd. But apart from that they play out brilliantly, with action always going on. You can kind of split-map on Entombed, but its the good kind of split map since you can out-maneuver your opponent and pick him apart due to the open mid, while with Antiga, BLs are good, but not too strong and you can either starve the zerg out or again, out-maneuver him. Really apart from those small flaws, Antiga and Entombed are great.
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
Funny thing is, statistically in PvZ it's quite Zerg favoured, I guess because it's near impossible to get a 4th for protoss too and then fight infestor brood on 3 base is too difficult. Hell, even TvZ is relatively balance 52.6% in Korea, 49.3% international.
Ohana, however, is a statistical clusterfuck. International: TvZ: 42-52 (44.7%) ZvP: 41-60 (40.6%) PvT: 40-32 (55.6%)
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
I guess you're trolling? Ohana was bad for ZvP because of the Immortal/Sentry all-in, certainly not because of the late game (from Z perspective).
On October 23 2012 21:19 FakeDeath wrote: Yes Ohana IS FINALLY REMOVED.
No more autowin for toss on that against zerg.
How is Ohana more broken than antiga and entombed?
Good to see a new map, I missed playing on something called bel'shir. Sad to see Ohana go I really liked that map, ah well knowing blizzard it'll be on ladder for atleast a year.
Ohana PvZ was immortal all in all day every day, lategame PvZ was damn near unplayable. Personally i liked ohana the least out of all current maps so i'm glad it's gone.
Well retarded Gateway allins being possible is more of a game issue imo. Antiga is even more broken for anything vs T, I would never want to play a ZvT on it and PvT is a nightmare too. Not saying Ohana didn't have issues and I agree that lategame ZvP is really hard for Zerg, but when maps like antiga are still in their pool I don't think Ohana should go.
Funny thing is, statistically in PvZ it's quite Zerg favoured, I guess because it's near impossible to get a 4th for protoss too and then fight infestor brood on 3 base is too difficult. Hell, even TvZ is relatively balance 52.6% in Korea, 49.3% international.
Ohana, however, is a statistical clusterfuck. International: TvZ: 42-52 (44.7%) ZvP: 41-60 (40.6%) PvT: 40-32 (55.6%)
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
BW changed maps pretty often and it was definitely a nice change of pace.
Wow that map looks nice :3 I seriously love how the 3rd looks. I would really love to see Antiga or Cloud Kingdom gone soon, I've seen so many games on those maps
On October 23 2012 23:23 Glurkenspurk wrote: If we don't remove antiga and entombed from tournament map pools I'm going to light myself on fire in protest.
We're right behind you on that one. Riiiiight behind you.
Not auto-3rd makes me instantly like this map. I'm wondering how mech will work out on it. Also, I was hoping for more new maps, because Daybreak gets just way too boring. Remember when they swapped all the maps in consequent OSLs? I would love to have that introduced in GSLs too.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
Because having the same map pool for well over a year while people are complaining about the game getting stale is not good business.
we need a jessica reskin of the map, so MMA can nuke daybreak all day long
On October 23 2012 21:42 Sinedd wrote: SC2 seriously needs more map circulation..
and bigger maps..
lol, really? maps are getting huge already
I dont think you know what should be called a HUGE map..
just check out BW ones
Different game, different results. Bigger is not always better.
Wierd how they keep adding maps where P has such a hard time taking a third in PvZ. Honestly in both Abyssal City and Bel'Shir Vestige, not going immortal sentry all-in is really really silly....so why the hell remove Ohana in the first place. All 3 maps promote that allin but at least on Ohana P can hold a third.
The third layout on the new map is like Dual Sight's and we know how that turns out.
Looks like a really bad map for toss... large ramps and openings to everything that's not a main. and with so much out-of-the-way space for proxy raxes
hope it plays better than the way im looking at it
Ohana was incredibly boring, glad they got rid of it And it begins to annoy me that maps need to be made so that PvZ is somewhat balanced. We're missing out on a lot of creativity
So, basically this is Daybreak reworked with harder to defend 3rd. I don't see the reason why both this AND Daybreak should stay. With similar layout, Bel'shir Vestige seems to have potential to replace Daybreak.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
holy crap imagine the effect on the game lol
I'd argue that the field of play in most sports takes a "PERSONALITY OF ITS OWN" much like maps do in Starcraft.
Football: -100 yards from goal line to goal line. with endzones each 10 yards deep. 160 feet between sidelines. -artificial turf -natural grass -indoor stadiums -take into consideration weather conditions like snow, ice, rain, extreme heat, extreme cold, wind, all of which play a role in how effective ball control is. -College football and Professional Football use two different sets of hash marks
Baseball: -what changes as far as dimensions in professional baseball and other leagues is the size of the outfield. the infield never changes, its a perfect square 90 feet per side. -indoor -outdoor -turf -natural grasss -aritficial turf -weather conditions like rain, mist, cold, heat, I have even seen games played with thousands of moths flying around. -depending on the time of day, the sun can play a major role in visability, shadows that fool the batter or the fielders -the baseball diamond has had the same dimensions for at least 150 years. 90 feet between each base in a perfect square. with the pitchers mound 60 feet 6 inches from homeplate directly in line between homeplate and second base.
Hockey: -very little changes in a Hockey arena, but the ice does change after 20 mins of skating on it. hence why the Zambonee resurfaces the ice between periods by the way, hockey and Baseball share this quality in that during breaks, the grounds crew can change the playing field by repairing flaws.
Basketball: -probably the only major sport with very little change to the field of play. the court for most major competitions is almost always indoors, in a controlled environment. -the biggest change to the sport of basketball was the implementation of the 3-point line. This 3-point line is still being changed to this day and has seen experimentation with distances to the basket in different leagues.
Tennis: -Grass, Clay, Concrete -concrete can have a number of different finishing surfaces one of which is Carpet used in some indoor arenas. -Grass courts and Clay courts can take on a personality of their own through wear and tear and are constantly being monitored and repaired. -Professional Tennis matches are almost always played in sunlight or artificial light, during non-precipitation. the only exception to this is that Clay can absorb water and can withstand a light drizzle. -Wind in outdoor matches can have a dramatic affect on ball control.
Soccer: -for being one of the most widely played sports in the world, Soccer has never had a set standard for the dimensions of the field. depending on where you are in the world. the field can be really big or kind of small. -in FIFA matches, the field must be 100-130 yards in length and 50-100 yards in width. -like many of the other sports, this game can be played on different types of fields. Grass, artificial turf, indoors, outdoors. -there are some varieties of the game that occur on much smaller fields like indoor arena type soccer games -this game has also seen a change in the types of soccer balls used. -outdoor games have seen its fair share of matches played in rain, wind, snow, extreme heat and extreme cold.
---------------
so as you can see. I think we miss the point sometimes that the map, even if its just the map, does become a character. its character shines through when strategies are conceived which take advantage of its character.
Sounds like for a lot of people the ideal map is something like Entombed. Blizzard might as well just reprogram the game to start everyone off with 3 bases and 66 workers. Save us the time.
Tournaments are too shy about maps. The SC2 scene would be a lot more dynamic if we changed all the maps each season, or each 2 seasons. Atleast chaging half of them each season, changing the other half next season.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
I'd argue that the field of play in most sports takes a "PERSONALITY OF ITS OWN" much like maps do in Starcraft.
Football: -100 yards from goal line to goal line. with endzones each 10 yards deep. 160 feet between sidelines. -artificial turf -natural grass -indoor stadiums -take into consideration weather conditions like snow, ice, rain, extreme heat, extreme cold, wind, all of which play a role in how effective ball control is. -College football and Professional Football use two different sets of hash marks
Baseball: -what changes as far as dimensions in professional baseball and other leagues is the size of the outfield. the infield never changes, its a perfect square 90 feet per side. -indoor -outdoor -turf -natural grasss -aritficial turf -weather conditions like rain, mist, cold, heat, I have even seen games played with thousands of moths flying around. -depending on the time of day, the sun can play a major role in visability, shadows that fool the batter or the fielders -the baseball diamond has had the same dimensions for at least 150 years. 90 feet between each base in a perfect square. with the pitchers mound 60 feet 6 inches from homeplate directly in line between homeplate and second base.
Hockey: -very little changes in a Hockey arena, but the ice does change after 20 mins of skating on it. hence why the Zambonee resurfaces the ice between periods by the way, hockey and Baseball share this quality in that during breaks, the grounds crew can change the playing field by repairing flaws.
Basketball: -probably the only major sport with very little change to the field of play. the court for most major competitions is almost always indoors, in a controlled environment. -the biggest change to the sport of basketball was the implementation of the 3-point line. This 3-point line is still being changed to this day and has seen experimentation with distances to the basket in different leagues.
Tennis: -Grass, Clay, Concrete -concrete can have a number of different finishing surfaces one of which is Carpet used in some indoor arenas. -Grass courts and Clay courts can take on a personality of their own through wear and tear and are constantly being monitored and repaired. -Professional Tennis matches are almost always played in sunlight or artificial light, during non-precipitation. the only exception to this is that Clay can absorb water and can withstand a light drizzle. -Wind in outdoor matches can have a dramatic affect on ball control.
Soccer: -for being one of the most widely played sports in the world, Soccer has never had a set standard for the dimensions of the field. depending on where you are in the world. the field can be really big or kind of small. -in FIFA matches, the field must be 100-130 yards in length and 50-100 yards in width. -like many of the other sports, this game can be played on different types of fields. Grass, artificial turf, indoors, outdoors. -there are some varieties of the game that occur on much smaller fields like indoor arena type soccer games -this game has also seen a change in the types of soccer balls used. -outdoor games have seen its fair share of matches played in rain, wind, snow, extreme heat and extreme cold.
---------------
so as you can see. I think we miss the point sometimes that the map, even if its just the map, does become a character. its character shines through when strategies are conceived which take advantage of its character.
which happens in any sport.
What you describe is more analogous to a map's tileset than the map layout. Everything you describe, the layout remains the same. Still two goals, still 15 feet from the ring, still a diamond, etc. It's only the tileset that really changes, as well as some physics changes but do we really want snow/beach/metal/grass maps to have bonus/penalties too?
Meh, nothing new or fancy. Well, it's a new map, which is always nice, but no real new ideas added, it's pretty much the same old. Generally, GSL have been doing a decent job at introducing maps, but I feel it's a shame that they trade new maps for new maps, while keeping all the really old ones. In this case, I am glad to see Ohana go, but meh, maps are in a really stale period right now. I'd love to see experimentation with removing the Xel'Naga Watchtowers some day.
EDIT: I may sound negative towards this map in the above, but it looks like a decent map, it's not this map I find boring, it's the overall map pool. Will have a go at playing a bit on it later.
Disagree on this map. Ohana is one of the best maps ever made and that map sucks for protoss so hard it will be replaced so fast, I wont even have to blink in my wait. Removed Ohana but not Valley. What the heck GSL. RIP Ohana and IronManSC.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
I'd argue that the field of play in most sports takes a "PERSONALITY OF ITS OWN" much like maps do in Starcraft.
Football: -100 yards from goal line to goal line. with endzones each 10 yards deep. 160 feet between sidelines. -artificial turf -natural grass -indoor stadiums -take into consideration weather conditions like snow, ice, rain, extreme heat, extreme cold, wind, all of which play a role in how effective ball control is. -College football and Professional Football use two different sets of hash marks
Baseball: -what changes as far as dimensions in professional baseball and other leagues is the size of the outfield. the infield never changes, its a perfect square 90 feet per side. -indoor -outdoor -turf -natural grasss -aritficial turf -weather conditions like rain, mist, cold, heat, I have even seen games played with thousands of moths flying around. -depending on the time of day, the sun can play a major role in visability, shadows that fool the batter or the fielders -the baseball diamond has had the same dimensions for at least 150 years. 90 feet between each base in a perfect square. with the pitchers mound 60 feet 6 inches from homeplate directly in line between homeplate and second base.
Hockey: -very little changes in a Hockey arena, but the ice does change after 20 mins of skating on it. hence why the Zambonee resurfaces the ice between periods by the way, hockey and Baseball share this quality in that during breaks, the grounds crew can change the playing field by repairing flaws.
Basketball: -probably the only major sport with very little change to the field of play. the court for most major competitions is almost always indoors, in a controlled environment. -the biggest change to the sport of basketball was the implementation of the 3-point line. This 3-point line is still being changed to this day and has seen experimentation with distances to the basket in different leagues.
Tennis: -Grass, Clay, Concrete -concrete can have a number of different finishing surfaces one of which is Carpet used in some indoor arenas. -Grass courts and Clay courts can take on a personality of their own through wear and tear and are constantly being monitored and repaired. -Professional Tennis matches are almost always played in sunlight or artificial light, during non-precipitation. the only exception to this is that Clay can absorb water and can withstand a light drizzle. -Wind in outdoor matches can have a dramatic affect on ball control.
Soccer: -for being one of the most widely played sports in the world, Soccer has never had a set standard for the dimensions of the field. depending on where you are in the world. the field can be really big or kind of small. -in FIFA matches, the field must be 100-130 yards in length and 50-100 yards in width. -like many of the other sports, this game can be played on different types of fields. Grass, artificial turf, indoors, outdoors. -there are some varieties of the game that occur on much smaller fields like indoor arena type soccer games -this game has also seen a change in the types of soccer balls used. -outdoor games have seen its fair share of matches played in rain, wind, snow, extreme heat and extreme cold.
---------------
so as you can see. I think we miss the point sometimes that the map, even if its just the map, does become a character. its character shines through when strategies are conceived which take advantage of its character.
which happens in any sport.
What you describe is more analogous to a map's tileset than the map layout. Everything you describe, the layout remains the same. Still two goals, still 15 feet from the ring, still a diamond, etc. It's only the tileset that really changes, as well as some physics changes but do we really want snow/beach/metal/grass maps to have bonus/penalties too?
The tileset doesn't effect the game or what strategies are effective. Consider football when it is snowing heavily out, you can no longer rely on long passes. Teams like the packers who utilize long passes to destroy teams will now have to alter how they play the matchup on that day (or that particular map). For tennis, difference surfaces favor different players, the best example is Nadal on clay courts. Baseball stadiums also change a lot for which team has an advantage and how you play the game. For instance, Yankee stadium is known to be very easy to hit homeruns in, compared to say Safeco field which is known to be very hard. That makes stadiums either pitcher's field or batter's field, which favors a team with either a better pitching lineup or the team who has better hitters. The field and the weather change how you have to play on certain "maps". It is not like a tileset at all, it changes how you have to play the game that day. Which I would liken to what harder to take thirds, lots of dead air space behind mineral lines, xel'naga towers in the middle of the map, and ramps at the natural do in starcraft - it changes how you approach the game on that day.
On October 24 2012 01:21 GohgamX wrote: Not going to say anything negative XD It's really big!
It is Ohana with these following flaws: Its to big. They copied of a map that was way better. 3rds are extinct for P in PvZ. IronManSC is gonna be really sad. Is that what you wanna say?
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
daybreak is the best map atm no?
Daybreak is a great map, and it's also old as fuck. I mean it's great that the map has endured for so long but it's time for something else, to be honest.
Weird logic, if it's great why would you change it and risking having a bad map instead ?
because watching games on the same maps forever is boring
Maybe for some people, but I'd imagine mostly not. CS1.6 had the same maps for most of its esport lifetime. DotA/LoL use the same single map and they're fine. Do football fields get boring because they all look the same?
yeah, football needs high ground, high yield minerals, destructible rocks and xelnaga towers!
I'd argue that the field of play in most sports takes a "PERSONALITY OF ITS OWN" much like maps do in Starcraft.
Football: -100 yards from goal line to goal line. with endzones each 10 yards deep. 160 feet between sidelines. -artificial turf -natural grass -indoor stadiums -take into consideration weather conditions like snow, ice, rain, extreme heat, extreme cold, wind, all of which play a role in how effective ball control is. -College football and Professional Football use two different sets of hash marks
Baseball: -what changes as far as dimensions in professional baseball and other leagues is the size of the outfield. the infield never changes, its a perfect square 90 feet per side. -indoor -outdoor -turf -natural grasss -aritficial turf -weather conditions like rain, mist, cold, heat, I have even seen games played with thousands of moths flying around. -depending on the time of day, the sun can play a major role in visability, shadows that fool the batter or the fielders -the baseball diamond has had the same dimensions for at least 150 years. 90 feet between each base in a perfect square. with the pitchers mound 60 feet 6 inches from homeplate directly in line between homeplate and second base.
Hockey: -very little changes in a Hockey arena, but the ice does change after 20 mins of skating on it. hence why the Zambonee resurfaces the ice between periods by the way, hockey and Baseball share this quality in that during breaks, the grounds crew can change the playing field by repairing flaws.
Basketball: -probably the only major sport with very little change to the field of play. the court for most major competitions is almost always indoors, in a controlled environment. -the biggest change to the sport of basketball was the implementation of the 3-point line. This 3-point line is still being changed to this day and has seen experimentation with distances to the basket in different leagues.
Tennis: -Grass, Clay, Concrete -concrete can have a number of different finishing surfaces one of which is Carpet used in some indoor arenas. -Grass courts and Clay courts can take on a personality of their own through wear and tear and are constantly being monitored and repaired. -Professional Tennis matches are almost always played in sunlight or artificial light, during non-precipitation. the only exception to this is that Clay can absorb water and can withstand a light drizzle. -Wind in outdoor matches can have a dramatic affect on ball control.
Soccer: -for being one of the most widely played sports in the world, Soccer has never had a set standard for the dimensions of the field. depending on where you are in the world. the field can be really big or kind of small. -in FIFA matches, the field must be 100-130 yards in length and 50-100 yards in width. -like many of the other sports, this game can be played on different types of fields. Grass, artificial turf, indoors, outdoors. -there are some varieties of the game that occur on much smaller fields like indoor arena type soccer games -this game has also seen a change in the types of soccer balls used. -outdoor games have seen its fair share of matches played in rain, wind, snow, extreme heat and extreme cold.
---------------
so as you can see. I think we miss the point sometimes that the map, even if its just the map, does become a character. its character shines through when strategies are conceived which take advantage of its character.
which happens in any sport.
What you describe is more analogous to a map's tileset than the map layout. Everything you describe, the layout remains the same. Still two goals, still 15 feet from the ring, still a diamond, etc. It's only the tileset that really changes, as well as some physics changes but do we really want snow/beach/metal/grass maps to have bonus/penalties too?
The tileset doesn't effect the game or what strategies are effective. Consider football when it is snowing heavily out, you can no longer rely on long passes. Teams like the packers who utilize long passes to destroy teams will now have to alter how they play the matchup on that day (or that particular map). For tennis, difference surfaces favor different players, the best example is Nadal on clay courts. Baseball stadiums also change a lot for which team has an advantage and how you play the game. For instance, Yankee stadium is known to be very easy to hit homeruns in, compared to say Safeco field which is known to be very hard. That makes stadiums either pitcher's field or batter's field, which favors a team with either a better pitching lineup or the team who has better hitters. The field and the weather change how you have to play on certain "maps". It is not like a tileset at all, it changes how you have to play the game that day. Which I would liken to what harder to take thirds, lots of dead air space behind mineral lines, xel'naga towers in the middle of the map, and ramps at the natural do in starcraft - it changes how you approach the game on that day.
I conceded that the various weather conditions, court materials, etc do have an effect, but it isn't analogous to map layout. It affects 'map physics' (such as, slippery ball on rain soaked field, easier to get tired in high altitude stadiums, balls don't roll on snowy fields, basically the stuff you mention). Unfortunately the different tilesets in SC2 don't affect map physics. If they did, beachy tilesets would slow down mech movement, snow maps would freeze/slow zerg units, and other similar effects. Pretty sure no one wants that.
I'm not saying that the different field conditions don't matter because they obviously do, I'm just saying that it isn't the same as having different map layouts, which is the topic of discussion.
The analogy just doesn't work very well. The closest you can make is with golf, because each course has a different layout.
On October 23 2012 21:19 GTR wrote: Remove Ohana, but not Antiga or Entombed (or even Daybreak)? Really?
Well Ohana is super fucking boring.
But it means family. Moving to a larger map again, feels to large map centric to me.
You can debate all the reasons behind it but the last few seasons have been really good concerning the ratio of races in ro8 and players relative skill aswell. I think the maps have something to do with that.
Why are Tournaments so lazy when it comes with maps? Change up the map pool already. Also can we get a map without Xelnaga Towers. Xelnaga Towers promotes lazyness and turtly play.
EDIT: One of the reasons I stopped laddering so much was because of how bored I got with the map pool. Don't make me get bored of GSL.
So am I just too dumb or is the new map not on EU battle.net? I can't find the new GSTL map either. I really miss the pre 1.5 times when I could just type in GSL and play their map pool T.T
why everybody puts that ---- xelnaga tower to all maps who need that it ruins game nothing interesting just camping around it nothing more......without it will be more interesting but now all map makers just give 1-4 xelnaga to destroy nearly whole map control by one vision in middle......this maps is just destroyed by xelnagas everywhere.making maps for dumbass afk campers not exciting attack or suprise.......no scout ... also sensor towers,xelnagas why when teran have scan , protoss obs, zerg overlords + low cost lings...... Where u see on BW xelnagas ???? where????another point where was BW better sadly for SC2 now.....
On October 23 2012 21:30 Arachne wrote: I don't think Toss can beat a zerg on this map
Edit: Hang on, does anyone see this as Daybreak, except the spawns have been swapped with bottom left to top left, and top right to bottom right? Its like the whole map has been rotated 90 degrees.
Rocks in the middle, xelnaga giving sight of the rocks, a pocket 3rd just outside the nat, a 3rd long the side, a 4th further down from the 3rd, etc etc
1. See a map for the first time 2. Making sweeping generalization
Excellent!
Map looks great and the pool is fantastic overall. I am a Z and I hate Antiga but I know it can create some interesting games -- not every map needs to favor us.
On October 23 2012 21:30 Arachne wrote: I don't think Toss can beat a zerg on this map
Edit: Hang on, does anyone see this as Daybreak, except the spawns have been swapped with bottom left to top left, and top right to bottom right? Its like the whole map has been rotated 90 degrees.
Rocks in the middle, xelnaga giving sight of the rocks, a pocket 3rd just outside the nat, a 3rd long the side, a 4th further down from the 3rd, etc etc
1. See a map for the first time 2. Making sweeping generalization
Excellent!
Map looks great and the pool is fantastic overall. I am a Z and I hate Antiga but I know it can create some interesting games -- not every map needs to favor us.
The problem is that with maps where Toss can't easily take a third, they tend to do nothing but 2 base all ins. Expect to see a lot of Immortal/Sentry.
I thought GOM were taking a new approach to maps instead of adding huge maps mix in a few shorter maps which changes the game tempo but obviously my trust has been misplaced.
From a Terran perspective looks like 2 Medivac pushes are hopeless on this map in TvP and any other matchup, the narrow routes make Mech the only viable choice.
On October 24 2012 01:49 lorestarcraft wrote: How is toss supposed to take a third here?
Exactly what I thought and I don't even play Protoss lol. Looks like a pretty good Zerg map, so many counter attack paths, not sure if this will work out at all.
The new map kinda looks like a flipped version of Dual Sight with expansions in the middle. I haven't played it, but defending the third and the main looks hard as balls, and even defending the fourth...
Really like all the ramps and the expansion placements though. Kinda looks like a new Daybreak to me! :D
I dunno if this map is really a worthy replacement of Ohana. Infact getting rid of Ohana at all seems like a really weird move. They aren't obligated to shove a new map in their pool every season.
What's the issue with Protoss taking a third on this map? Is it because it's far from natural? Isn't the issue that Zerg can too easily defend their thirds? I haven't played in a while but Protoss seems to have success with things like immortal pushes to stop or heavily damage the third if you can micro well.
Seems very interesting. I think as Toss you can deny the Zerg a lot when you abuse all the chokes on the map but it´s still very zerg favored imo. I hope some pros do games on that map so we can see how it turns out for PvZ.
I would personally like it if they rotate out 2 or 3 maps per season, and be a bit more experimental here and there. It would make the game more interesting.
I'm glad Ohana is out, because of the Sentry/Immortal push from Protoss, the PvZ games seemed a bit dull. I always liked the Bel'Shir maps, I love the tileset. It seems like it's another macromap, so isn't the mappool too macro oriënted?
Why people talk about Immortal/sentry on Ohana? It is one of the worst map to do this strategy due to huge area to split army for zerg.
???
You can't break your natural rocks in time so reinforcing is obnoxious. It's really easy for toss to just kinda waddle up your ramp and forcefield your shit. You won't have enough units to stop the initial walk from toss natural to zerg base either.
WHY REMOVE OHANA? Have they no heart for all those that will not be informed that Ohana means family, and will continute to live out their life in such a sad state?
On October 24 2012 05:40 Whitewing wrote: This new map looks super hard for protoss, dunno how you'd take a third and hold it.
By denying an opponent's third... Protoss is strong with two bases.
Denying a third, hahahahaha
What current metagame build even does that? Unless you count super greedy Zergs who are not prepared for the +1 4 Zealot warp in, I'm not really sure of any builds designed to kill/prevent a third that aren't all ins.
Map is not bad, but the 3rd is -really- poorly designed considering today's meta.
If the mapmaker just inverted the 3rd to be a highground instead of a lowground it would help a lot. But even then it would probably be slightly tricky for P to take a 3rd. Oh well, another map where all PvZs will be 2 base all-ins. Yay. Just shows that even the most competent tournament we have is still pretty damn incompetent when it comes to maps. The tournaments really need to start listening to the community.
Well, it looks fine, but it's more of the same really. Also I agree with previous posters about Xel'naga towers. In my opinion these "things" should never appear on competitive maps.
On October 23 2012 21:30 Arachne wrote: I don't think Toss can beat a zerg on this map
Edit: Hang on, does anyone see this as Daybreak, except the spawns have been swapped with bottom left to top left, and top right to bottom right? Its like the whole map has been rotated 90 degrees.
Rocks in the middle, xelnaga giving sight of the rocks, a pocket 3rd just outside the nat, a 3rd long the side, a 4th further down from the 3rd, etc etc
1. See a map for the first time 2. Making sweeping generalization
Excellent!
Map looks great and the pool is fantastic overall. I am a Z and I hate Antiga but I know it can create some interesting games -- not every map needs to favor us.
See map 1st time, Look at map, look at ramps, see multiple large access points to where protoss's 3rd can be, analyze likelihood of toss making mutiple 4 gateway walls, cross reference with the distance of the natural's minerals to the main's minerals to the likely location of the 3rd, and the distance to those mineral's, predict Muta from zerg most games vs toss, see toss scrambling to hold muta play, leaving two base timings as the stronger option, realize that toss 2 base timings have been mostly figured out, even the dreaded 2 base sentry immo push,
On October 24 2012 05:40 Whitewing wrote: This new map looks super hard for protoss, dunno how you'd take a third and hold it.
By denying an opponent's third... Protoss is strong with two bases.
Denying a third, hahahahaha
What current metagame build even does that? Unless you count super greedy Zergs who are not prepared for the +1 4 Zealot warp in, I'm not really sure of any builds designed to kill/prevent a third that aren't all ins.
Not playing standard is the best way to win. Zerg thirds die to skillful Protoss pushes. Not zealot warp ins though. more like immortal pushes with warp prism micro.
Whirlwind: TvZ: 15-17 (46.9%) [ Games ] ZvP: 11-12 (47.8%) [ Games ] PvT: 16-12 (57.1%) [ Games ] Verdict: Even with big advantage for Protoss against Terran
Man, Antiga needs to go soon too. Feels like every game ever stalls out on 3 bases and the only way to get a 4th is to clearly be ahead because 4ths are forever away from your 3rd unless you take the middle.
It's just a shit map imo - regardless of 'balance'.
Base layout is almost identical. But, this new map is much more difficult to turtle on because the expos are on lowground and are more open. I'd of course like a different map, but I feel like this is what Daybreak should have been. Preferably connecting the highground with rocks instead of lowground path to enforce the central highground.
On October 24 2012 08:13 mrRoflpwn wrote: WHY DID YOU REMOVE OHANA AND NOT ANTIGA FUCKYARD!!!????
I can't agree enough.
Ohana is such a good map, why is Antiga-freaking-Shipyard still in? Its such a blergh map.
Ohana is such a good map... /cry. D-:
Ohana IMO is one of the worst examples of a SC map. I've mentioned it countless times before, but it's so tight and the bases are so close together it doesn't reward army movement atall, I mean you've basically got a free fourth once you take your third.
All of these people are glad Ohana is gone and yet the new map is almost exactly the same except it is a little bigger and has an extra half base for each side.
On October 24 2012 10:15 Robotix wrote: All of these people are glad Ohana is gone and yet the new map is almost exactly the same except it is a little bigger and has an extra half base for each side.
Sure it has stuff in common with Daybreak, but it's nothing like Ohana at all. You can't just move down your natural ramp and have a third instantly secure.
It's nice to see fresh maps. I do wish, however, that Blizz would always just go ahead and add the GSL maps to their ladder pool. (instead of stupid shit like Tal'Darim with no rocks) This way the community would be more familiar with the maps and it's always more enjoyable, imo, to see games on maps that you know well/can relate to.
im glad to see ohana gone from the pool and whirlwind stay in, but shiiiiiiit antiga is so boring and tired. holding a 4th is damn near impossible unless you're a terran with a planetary on a gold base.
The map terrain is different but the expansion spots are almost exactly like Ohana's. In fact, the map looks like Ohana but with more trees and hills relocated to center.
Am I only the one that thought the map looked like Ohana at first glance?
The new maps looks nice, would like to have seen daybreak/entombed/antigia be removed before ohana. Hopefully more tournaments change there map pools as often as GSL does (I wish it was more but it's better than never)
Theres no cannon spots in the main (for PvP) like xel naga caverns, or daybreak, however there are some okay spots for cannoning zerg, Natural (3pylon):
I don't understand all the Antiga vs Ohana whining? Antiga is one of the more unique maps in the map pool, why would you want it gone? One of my favorite things about Ohana is how clearly everything is visible there, but I guess the new map will share this property. I am sad to see Ohana go, but if anything Bel'Shir Vestige should replace Daybreak...
On October 24 2012 10:20 flodeskum wrote: I really don't like the xel'naga placements. Why does every map have to have them anyway?
Agreed, I'd LOVE to see some professional maps without xel'nagas. I think this would require some additional strategy or tricks. Though it might give Z an advantage, as they tend to rely the least on xel'nagas for vision, but that of course could be compensated by other map features.
I'm not to sure how I feel about the new map. Looking at the picture I'm getting the Crossfire map vibe, but I guess I'll just have to see games played on it.
The only thing I see is that they are making maps such Abyssal City and this new thing in which the third is awefuly hard to defend from protoss perspective. I really don't know how would anyone withstand a roach ling fast max when both choices por thirds are so far away from your wall on your natural, and have two ramps leading to the nexi.
Seems to me they want to favor more agressive play but at the cost of screwing up PvZ there.
On October 24 2012 21:39 GOLDuX wrote: The only thing I see is that they are making maps such Abyssal City and this new thing in which the third is awefuly hard to defend from protoss perspective. I really don't know how would anyone withstand a roach ling fast max when both choices por thirds are so far away from your wall on your natural, and have two ramps leading to the nexi.
Seems to me they want to favor more agressive play but at the cost of screwing up PvZ there.
Thing is, if we need to make all maps damn near identical just to give protoss a chance to do anything other than a 2 base all-in in PvZ, it might be worth looking at the game itself and not the maps.
If we balance the game around only these massive maps with free-ish 3rd bases the we'll lose a lot of diversity in SC2 (which I'd argue has already happened).
Even if the game was a clusterfuck of balance in the early days there is something to be said for maps like scrap station, blistering sands, desert oasis and delta quadrant. They all had drasticly different gameplay that made the game a lot more interesting to watch and play.
Thing is, if we need to make all maps damn near identical just to give protoss a chance to do anything other than a 2 base all-in in PvZ, it might be worth looking at the game itself and not the maps.
If we balance the game around only these massive maps with free-ish 3rd bases the we'll lose a lot of diversity in SC2 (which I'd argue has already happened).
Exactly my thoughts. It is kinda dumb that there needs to be maps made so toss can take a third safely like Terran or zerg. The problem and difference between them and toss is that they can manage to defend most thinng if scouted on time whereas toss even with perfect macro and great multitasking can't. The example are those two maps. So I think the issue is balance. Maybe it is the high price in gas for basic units vs cheap equal powerful ones. Maybe is that Gretorp post thing saying all there is to it on toss early game is the existence of Forcefields (which I thing its not only bad for the other races- since in certain situations is very powerful- but for the actual race too, it narrows almost every strategy to using them) or maybe is just a problem related to an idea like "chess boards are the same for every game. Why should we change the base form it?" I realize that the aswer to this is that we like diversity but if that gives other race a heavy advantage when both sides play macro ( narrowing as you just said to 2 base all ins over and over again) I think it shoul be not there, the map I mean. Unless some of the problems I listed get solved I think it just is an obstacle to fair play.
Meh, oh well... had to go at some point. I am at least thankful and proud that I was one of the few who achieved a GSL spot. More importantly to me, I'm glad that Ohana was able to finish its lifetime in pro play at a very balanced record between the MU's. I would have rather seen it go at its peak moment(s) than see it take a nose dive first.
Am I really in the minority that thought ohana was a terrible map? I mean if you just look at it and belshir beach you can tell it was a ripoff of belshir but worse. The map was really boring and annoying to play on, it feels like the only reason people liked it so much was it was all pretty and sandy.
On October 25 2012 02:22 hunts wrote: Am I really in the minority that thought ohana was a terrible map? I mean if you just look at it and belshir beach you can tell it was a ripoff of belshir but worse. The map was really boring and annoying to play on, it feels like the only reason people liked it so much was it was all pretty and sandy.
As much as I don't like Ohana, both maps have nothing in common except some vague notion of beachiness.
Every time you say two maps are the same because of tileset, god kills a kitten. Think about the kittens.
On October 25 2012 02:22 hunts wrote: Am I really in the minority that thought ohana was a terrible map? I mean if you just look at it and belshir beach you can tell it was a ripoff of belshir but worse. The map was really boring and annoying to play on, it feels like the only reason people liked it so much was it was all pretty and sandy.
As much as I don't like Ohana, both maps have nothing in common except some vague notion of beachiness.
Every time you say two maps are the same because of tileset, god kills a kitten. Think about the kittens.
Look at the general layout of where all the bases are and you'll see ohana basically just copied the idea of belshir beach and just changed up the middle of the map a bit.
err nevermind I was looking at the new belshir map in the OP, not the original belshir beach. I thought something looked off :/ sorry.
On October 25 2012 07:21 FreedomMurder wrote: How protoss can take a safe 3rd on this new map vs. zerg is beyond me. 2 base all ins it is i guess =/
The fact that you NEED easy to take third on every map because of how bad protoss is design is really making it hard to have any progress in map making I feel.
On October 25 2012 03:54 Connor987 wrote: Dont like that they kept whirlwind, fed up of hearing, 'this map is basically a free win for zerg' thats not how balance should work
I cant believe that terrans are stilling winning matches on these big maps. Warp in mechanic and speedlings become so much more powerful on big maps. I honestly believe that the top tier terrans have the best mechanics.
Bel'Shir Vestige looks really interesting and have lots of possibilities, in my opinion. hoping it will come to the ladder map pool. Can someone explain me why the "late game expansions" have less gas and minerals? Or maybe give me a link that could explain it?
On October 24 2012 07:17 Incomplet wrote: Map Stats (Korea Only)
Whirlwind: TvZ: 15-17 (46.9%) [ Games ] ZvP: 11-12 (47.8%) [ Games ] PvT: 16-12 (57.1%) [ Games ] Verdict: Even with big advantage for Protoss against Terran
I can not find these maps in custom games, I could find them once upon a time. But after a long time when I tried for the first time to find a GSL map the new "Bel'shir Vestige" map, which seemed to me playable and interesting, I could not find any GSL maps anymore. Is there a solution to this situation?
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i1ffb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/afmn0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8pag4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/btzSK.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ofHYs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pycpi.jpg)
