EPTKeSPA SC2 Maps being developed for next Proleague - Page 21
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mr. Black
United States470 Posts
| ||
|
EliteSK
Korea (South)251 Posts
| ||
|
bduddy
United States1326 Posts
On November 16 2012 23:01 Arceus wrote: KeSPA being KeSPA... well, hopefully they at least paid him for it.Caldeum is made by Crux_LS http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=364336¤tpage=All It also appears on Crux website for a while but got deleted. According to his sign, LS has worked for KeSPA and apparently, the map is ordered to be removed from TL and Crux | ||
|
TimENT
United States1425 Posts
| ||
|
amazingxkcd
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On November 16 2012 23:48 AxionSteel wrote: Well they were forced to remove atlantis spaceship and metropolis which was ok.. But what've they introduced since? Belshir vestige? looks like another big zerg map. Abyssal city is big and heavily favours zerg against terran so far. Whirlwind is awesome in tvt but has problems in other matchups. They still seem to have a "bigger is better" approach from what i've seen. Actually whirlwind has been awesome for tvz as well. It's produced some awesome games and it's not heavily zerg favored either as it makes going that bl/corr/infestor ball not viable. Big maps like whirlwind (at least vs terran) make those kind of armies not viable because terran can just go for a base trade if they have to and the zerg will not be able to defend vs it if that is what happens. Big maps make ultra/ling/bane/infestor a lot better and more entertaining to watch to. I'll never understand why terrans hate big maps like whirlwind in tvz when it's not bad for terran players at all except for tvp, but that's because of warp in and what ^_^. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12054 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:24 TimENT wrote: I can't wait to see Kespa players play on these maps! Gonna be so awesome to see intense practice on a completely different map pool and metagame. It won't just be kespa players if they're in the OSL. Also a mixed teamleague is also possible. | ||
|
TimENT
United States1425 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:36 Qikz wrote: It won't just be kespa players if they're in the OSL. Also a mixed teamleague is also possible. I want to see what the Kespa practice regime will be able to do. | ||
|
Crushgroove
United States793 Posts
| ||
|
Dionyseus
United States2068 Posts
On November 16 2012 06:15 memcpy wrote: I feel like increasing the number of maps that players are required to play will decrease the overall quality of games. Less time to prepare map specific builds or strategies and less time to practice against others. Aside from that, the maps do look diverse and interesting. I just hope there won't be too many exploits or racial imbalances. In the short term it would result in lower quality games, but it has the potential of increasing overall quality in the long term by requiring players to work harder (more maps to study) to achieve good results. However by having Kespa players play in maps that GSL players don't play it would handicap Kespa players in GSL tournaments. | ||
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:44 Dionyseus wrote: In the short term it would result in lower quality games, but it has the potential of increasing overall quality in the long term by requiring players to work harder (more maps to study) to achieve good results. However by having Kespa players play in maps that GSL players don't play it would handicap Kespa players in GSL tournaments. would go the other way too, GSL players in the OSL/PL would do worse than otherwise haha | ||
|
Steelo_Rivers
United States1968 Posts
| ||
|
Levernz
Canada50 Posts
| ||
|
ACrow
Germany6583 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:49 Levernz wrote: About time, stop whining BW maps are great. Different games are different. Not saying that they cannot be great, rather that no one can know. That's why some people, me included, are voicing concerns, because some of the maps have attributes that according to conventional wisdom would be bad, especially for Protoss. Only because they were great for BW doesn't automatically make them great for SC2. | ||
|
Dionyseus
United States2068 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:45 opterown wrote: would go the other way too, GSL players in the OSL/PL would do worse than otherwise haha Good point. | ||
|
BlazeFury01
United States1460 Posts
On November 17 2012 05:54 ACrow wrote: Different games are different. Not saying that they cannot be great, rather that no one can know. That's why some people, me included, are voicing concerns, because some of the maps have attributes that according to conventional wisdom would be bad, especially for Protoss. Only because they were great for BW doesn't automatically make them great for SC2. Let the pros decide what's best. | ||
|
Madder
Australia427 Posts
On November 17 2012 03:12 bduddy wrote: KeSPA being KeSPA... well, hopefully they at least paid him for it. Paid or not, it's the map maker's choice to go along with KeSPA. I'd prefer of thinking about it that way instead of being a douche about it. | ||
|
Madder
Australia427 Posts
On November 16 2012 06:15 memcpy wrote: I feel like increasing the number of maps that players are required to play will decrease the overall quality of games. Less time to prepare map specific builds or strategies and less time to practice against others. You say that, yet we have seen the same maps in GSL for many seasons. | ||
|
LuckyMacro
United States1482 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
| ||
| ||
