In keeping with our goal of providing a variety of map styles within the ladder pool, we created three new 1v1 maps and two new 2v2 maps that should shake up gameplay this season. However, making additions to the ladder pool means we’ll need to swap out a few of last season’s maps. Before we check out the new digs for 2013 Ladder Season 3, here are the maps we’ll be removing:
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
Additionally, we decided to take a new direction with the map creation process heading into season 3. Once we decided which maps would be included in the pool, we sent them over to an array of major tournament organizers for review, including: GomTV, OnGameNet, KeSPA, ESL, MLG, Dreamhack, and NASL. Based on their feedback, we implemented a variety of suggested changes and tagged each map that underwent this process as “Tournament Edition”, or “TE” for short. If this experiment works out well this season, we’ll continue to iterate and improve on it going forward. We’d also like to thank all of our tournament partners for participating in this endeavor to create exciting new maps.
The 1v1 Ladder Map Pool
(2)Derelict Watcher TE
Derelict Watcher is a 1v1 map with a comfortable rush distance, and a straightforward third base location. Don’t let this fool you into taking it easy though, as the additional base locations after your third will require that you keep a close eye on the variety of attack paths that become available during the later stages of the game. You can also utilize the terrain to help coordinate your attack and defense tactics by breaking or protecting the rocks and towers near these expansion locations on the North and South sides of the map. Additionally, Xel’Naga Watchtowers overlook the two side paths that lead toward the corners of the map. However, they don’t provide vision of the map's center area, nor the additional attack paths that can be opened up by breaking the destructible rocks found near the twelve and six o’clock expansion locations, so make sure to watch these areas well if you are expanding toward those directions.
Poll: First impressions of Derelict Watcher TE
Thumbs Up (997)
81%
Thumbs Down (154)
13%
No Thumbs (73)
6%
1224 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of Derelict Watcher TE
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
(2)Klontas Mire TE
Always be prepared for early aggression on this map, as the narrow bridge to the North makes for a very short rush distance. You can make use of the fact that the bridge is very narrow and can be blocked off using structures, but keep in mind that there are still additional attack paths available for use by your opponent. In the mid and later stages of the game, the map will play similar to other macro maps. Just remember to always watch for small groups of enemy forces crossing the bridge throughout the game. There are no Xel’Naga Towers on this map, so you might want to move a few scouting units out to key regions of the map in order to watch for incoming attacks at your defensive locations.
Poll: First impressions of Klontas Mire TE
Thumbs Down (912)
64%
Thumbs Up (381)
27%
No Thumbs (141)
10%
1434 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of Klontas Mire TE
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
(4)Zerus Prime TE
Though Zerus Prime features four starting locations, vertical spawns have been disabled, which means your expansion flow will be similar each game. You can take advantage of the choke point leading into your natural expansion to defend it with some ease, but keep a close eye on the destructible rocks to the south, which will open a backdoor path to your natural when destroyed. There’s just one very large central attack path toward your opponent’s half of the map, but it is possible to sneak small squads of units around the vision granted by the Xel’Naga Watchtowers, so keep an eye on your far away base locations lest they fall victim to surprise attacks.
Poll: First impressions of Zerus Prime TE
Thumbs Up (582)
53%
Thumbs Down (386)
35%
No Thumbs (124)
11%
1092 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of Zerus Prime TE
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
The 2v2 Ladder Map Pool
(4)Geosync Quarry
There are plenty of expansions that can be taken safely on this fortress-style map, including a rich-mineral base found inside your team’s fortress, which can be taken once the destructible rocks there are cleared. Coordinate with your ally with this in mind, because this map will play very differently compared other 2v2 maps you may have become comfortable with. Taking control of a Xel’Naga Tower near the center of the map will give your team access to a second rich mineral base. If you can keep control of this base, you probably won’t need to expand along the sides of the map. Play a defensive, macro-heavy game and remember to watch your backdoor rocks closely for sneak attacks.
Poll: First impressions of Geosync Quarry
Thumbs Up (342)
74%
Thumbs Down (89)
19%
No Thumbs (30)
7%
461 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of Geosync Quarry
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
(4)Reclamation
On Reclamation your ally won’t start right next to you, so expect rushes during the early game. You can us the Xel’Naga Watchtowers to help monitor attack paths leading to your bases with some ease during the mid to late game, as the towers overlook both attack paths that lead to your team’s half of the map. This means that a lot of games will come down to which team can secure more bases along the sides of the map. Focus on securing and defending the additional bases while holding the Xel’Naga Watchtowers to spot for incoming attacks.
Poll: First impressions of Reclamation
Thumbs Up (317)
76%
Thumbs Down (74)
18%
No Thumbs (28)
7%
419 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of Reclamation
(Vote): Thumbs Up (Vote): Thumbs Down (Vote): No Thumbs
All of the maps above have already been published to the custom games list in order to give you a chance to check them out before the season roll. Once the season has rolled on May 1, they will then appear in the matchmaking queues for competitive play. So feel free to play a few games on the new maps and let us know what you think in the comment section below.
Good luck and have fun in the 2013 Season 3 ladder!
FINALLY Daybreak is gone. It's been in there way too damn long. The second map especially looks quite interesting, reminds me of Scrap Station, actually.
Blizzard is really good at making either incredibly boring maps, or incredibly shit maps. It's honestly kind of impressive that they've gone this long without ever making a good map.
The removal of daybreak was a revolutionary idea, was it good? whos to say as of yet, (zerg no approve though) removal of newkirk makes me want to slap some1 Derelict Watcher looks like a complete ripoff of the worst map in the map pool: Star Station otherwise, good/neutral changes
On April 26 2013 10:16 MichaelDonovan wrote: Hmmm I don't see why they got rid of Daybreak... Is that map not good anymore? I still like playing on it.
No it's just the fact that it's really really old and it's been played so much people are tired of it.
Interesting maps. The only one that I'm not too sure about is Klontas Mire. Sort of ugly and I'm not sure how the games will play out, but I do like to see Blizz getting a bit more variety and taking some risks with the maps.
I'm not sure what GSL et al. were thinking with Klontas Mire, but dare I say they all look fun? Klontas could provide a nice change of pace to what we've had, let's not knock it just yet.
On April 26 2013 10:12 Ricoic wrote: Nice we needed new maps, but they replaced newkirk with pretty much upside down reskined newkirk The others look interesting though.
I don't see any updated Newkirk maps... So I'm not sure what you are talking about lol...
And the maps look amazing, I hated a lot of the other maps that Blizzard has released for this season...
Yeah have to agree 2nd one looks a bit strange, destructible rocks on the high ground and that ninja path. I guess Zerg would take the 3rd hugging the wall? The one toward opponent is like 5s distance in a medivac.
3rd one looks extremely easy to split, and then there's a ridiculous amount of bases. So big overall with so few paths, idk how that will work out.
some of these maps have wierd features, like this one map with the very small bridge like choke. It could be cool if the ladder maps were just "standard" maps with no extraordinary features that don't require huge changes in your buildorders that aren't gonna help you anything if that specific map isen't in the tournament mappool/pools. other than that it seems decent
I agree with their choice of map removal. Daybreak done its time and the two others sucked a lot. As for their new proposition, (2)Derelict Watcher TE looks very promising, the second one is very bad imo and i'm neutral on the 3rd one.
On April 26 2013 10:36 BoggieMan wrote: some of these maps have wierd features, like this one map with the very small bridge like choke. It could be cool if the ladder maps were just "standard" maps with no extraordinary features that don't require huge changes in your buildorders that aren't gonna help you anything if that specific map isen't in the tournament mappool/pools. other than that it seems decent
I WANT weird maps every now and then, though. Keeps things interesting. It's especially important if the desire is to codify the map pool across a range of tournaments, and have the ladder maps actually be relevant to the pro scene.
man all three look rather boring, all that expansion flow seems really simple, overused and uninteresting for me hope that Blizzard wont shove it down our throat by forcing major organizations to include these stuffs
Derelict Watcher TE looks amazing and awesome, like one of the best in the ladder pool.
Zerus Prime TE looks pretty cool, kinda interesting map. Klontas Mire TE another intresting map, not sure how that bridge thing is gonna work, I feel like fast expands will be hard to do.
On April 26 2013 10:44 HeeroFX wrote: Derelict Watcher TE looks amazing and awesome, like one of the best in the ladder pool.
Zerus Prime TE looks pretty cool, kinda interesting map. Klontas Mire TE another intresting map, not sure how that bridge thing is gonna work, I feel like fast expands will be hard to do.
Agreed Derelict watcher looks dynamic and really good
Klontas Mire TE effectively shuts down any chance for Zerg to get a decent economy early on (2 base) without overly committing in units in ZvP. Veto #1.
Zerus Prime TE, I really really hate the single choke play which forces Zerg to waltz into a choke, or play mutalisks. Either way, single spot to engage with ground is not favourable, veto #2.
Zerus Prime TE vaguely reminds me of Entombed Valley, but it's probably because of the expansion layout for the main-natural-third. Derelict Watcher looks really shiny and seems decent, bu we'll see how it does. Klontas Mire looks like an auto-veto, but the tiny path in the top middle of the map looks kinda interesting. There have been experiments on community-made maps with such tiny corridors on mirror-symmetry maps, so it's interesting to see Blizzard possibly try it out, though it looks this particular pathway looks large enough for most units to fit through. Nevertheless, the rest of the map seems rather mediocre.
I was hoping that the KeSPA-made Newkirk Redevelopment Precinct would make it into the map pool to replace the old Newkirk Precinct, but it looks like that hasn't happened. I really wish they would go for more community-made maps instead of these ones since Derelict Watcher and Zerus Prime look like good veto candidates. Perhaps the TL Map Contest will be another breath of fresh air.
On April 26 2013 10:12 .kv wrote: i'm happy for new maps but this one
no please lol
God that map looks awful Nobody's going to take that third when the 4th is easier to defend. That third looks so mind numbingly stupid with 3 or 4 different attack paths leading into it. All choked up and narrow, too. Forcefield galore incoming.
On April 26 2013 10:37 Arceus wrote: man all three look rather boring, all that expansion flow seems really simple, overused and uninteresting for me hope that Blizzard wont shove it down our throat by forcing major organizations to include these stuffs
since when have they forced tournament organizers to use their maps?
anyway, second map looks...i dunno lol. it's ugly at the very least. third seems too big (i hate huge macro maps). that second 2v2 map where you spawn right next to your opponent...either really fun, or really lame. probably both lol.
Who vetted these maps? These are all borderline imbalanced (at best!), and they're all just bad design. I honestly can't believe effort was put into this crop of disappointments. I really hope Blizzard can do better than this in the near future. Their intentions are good but legitimizing these maps with "TE" mumbo jumbo is a disservice to every part of the community.
Really happy with the removals. Newkirk and Korhal City were awful, and daybreak was way too dated. Kind of interested for Klontas Mire too. It looks pretty silly, but whatever, it'll be a change of pace at least.
On April 26 2013 10:36 BoggieMan wrote: some of these maps have wierd features, like this one map with the very small bridge like choke. It could be cool if the ladder maps were just "standard" maps with no extraordinary features that don't require huge changes in your buildorders that aren't gonna help you anything if that specific map isen't in the tournament mappool/pools. other than that it seems decent
I WANT weird maps every now and then, though. Keeps things interesting. It's especially important if the desire is to codify the map pool across a range of tournaments, and have the ladder maps actually be relevant to the pro scene.
I agree with this, There should be at least 1-2 and preferably 3 maps with 'weird' features on them. If somebody wants to play only on standard maps they could veto the weird ones, and I honestly get bored of playing on similarly designed maps all the time. I'm actually pretty excited for Klontas Mire TE, though I can see why a Zerg would want to veto it.
Zerus Prime looks pretty bad. It may be a large map, but the actual layout is pretty bad. The lack of paths through the middle will ruin it completely. They should at least make lanes on the top and bottom to allow flow from one side to the other.
And for the Mire place, are the spawns at the top right and top left or the two middle things? Because the two middle things obviously wouldn't work and the top ones have really bad layout for just about anything and any race.
I don't think Blizzard realizes that making random shit just for it to be "new" doesn't actually make the map any good. Ohwell.
On April 26 2013 10:45 Aelonius wrote: Klontas Mire TE effectively shuts down any chance for Zerg to get a decent economy early on (2 base) without overly committing in units in ZvP. Veto #1.
Zerus Prime TE, I really really hate the single choke play which forces Zerg to waltz into a choke, or play mutalisks. Either way, single spot to engage with ground is not favourable, veto #2.
You can also uses drops, something forgotten or use Nydus worms to go around, your opponent won't have 50% of the map with vision. There are other options.
There should be an achievement for mining out Zerus Prime considering how many expansions are on that map. Come to think of it, it might even be that difficult if the two players spawn on the left and right since the middle looks like a rather thin choke. Whereas on Newkirk Precinct you get 7 expansions per side of map, you get 9 expansions per side on Zerus.
On April 26 2013 10:45 Aelonius wrote: Klontas Mire TE effectively shuts down any chance for Zerg to get a decent economy early on (2 base) without overly committing in units in ZvP. Veto #1.
Zerus Prime TE, I really really hate the single choke play which forces Zerg to waltz into a choke, or play mutalisks. Either way, single spot to engage with ground is not favourable, veto #2.
You can also uses drops, something forgotten or use Nydus worms to go around, your opponent won't have 50% of the map with vision. There are other options.
Roach+Hydra is barely (if at all) viable on it, though. There is no easy way to engage a terran army with widow mines and tanks on something like that. Protoss varies a bit more, I suppose, but even then, I think the matches on that map will all suck. =/
Has anyone else tried to wall off your natural on derelict watcher? It seems incredibly hard to do so without having to put down 4 buildings as protoss. And you get red building squares on the edge of the ramp.
I like Klontas Mire TE. Its trying something different than the basic map making rule guide 101 and can make for some interesting games. Until we play it we do not know how bad or good it will turn out.
Daybreak was one of the best maps ever made, but it's time is gone! The first map looks lovely, second map looks good gameplay wise but need some major works on the asthetics.
On April 26 2013 11:07 las91 wrote: Klontas looks like an eerily close map to the old Scrap Station. Just no island. I like the look of the two other 1v1 maps though.
I thought the same thing, but with a regular main ramp.
Sorry for my ignorance but only recently got back into 1v1 and only have like 100 games played 1v1. What was the problem with daybreak? (I know its been in the pool for ages, but balance-wise it seems ok to me, I play random and don't have it blocked). I know It was really hard for toss to take a 3rd base vs Zerg back when the fast max on roaches and push was all the rage but that was so long ago.
On April 26 2013 11:16 paddyz wrote: Sorry for my ignorance but only recently got back into 1v1 and only have like 100 games played 1v1. What was the problem with daybreak? (I know its been in the pool for ages, but balance-wise it seems ok to me, I play random and don't have it blocked). I know It was really hard for toss to take a 3rd base vs Zerg back when the fast max on roaches and push was all the rage but that was so long ago.
No problem with it, it got removed because it was old.
i dont get why people want balanced or near-balanced maps removed... daybreak was a perfectly fine map, now we get klontas for it? yeah great.
seriously how is there supposed to be any map-balance, when ppl always cry about wanting to have "innovative" maps, which just favor some race in some matchups quite heavily.
Well, these maps are all easily downvotes for me (except for the space platform one, maybe - I'd prefer that over Shit Station). What the fuck has gotten into their heads that they make 3 bases (and even 4 on that Zerus map) so fucking easy to take.
Really Blizzard?
When are you going to let the community make all the ladder maps? This is just another disappointment.
Klontas Mire looks like the most depressing map ever made. Can someone convince Blizzard that it has no chance and that they should bring back Cloud Kingdom instead? I still can't comprehend why Daybreak got another season over CK. Start Station should also be removed imo, there are lots of good maps out there that get no publicity, we shouldn't have to settle with mediocrity.
On a brighter note, Derelict looks nice and shiny. I also can't wait to abuse tempests on Zerus Prime
On April 26 2013 10:12 .kv wrote: i'm happy for new maps but this one
no please lol
I agree this map looks particularly terrible.
plz tell me that this is just Blizzard pranking us..
omfg.. I don't have enough vetos at all.. T_T
Blizzard wasn't the only one making the maps, tournament makers had a say too
Yeah, that's true. At least Blizzard is moving in the right direction by seeking some community guidance.
But there's still room for improvement. Blizzard really needs a group of both pro-gamers and tournament makers who could evaluate maps in their potential for entertaining games & relative balance.
On April 26 2013 11:28 Qwyn wrote: Well, these maps are all easily downvotes for me (except for the space platform one, maybe - I'd prefer that over Shit Station). What the fuck has gotten into their heads that they make 3 bases (and even 4 on that Zerus map) so fucking easy to take.
Really Blizzard?
When are you going to let the community make all the ladder maps? This is just another disappointment.
because its incredibly bad for toss to have 3rds which are not defendable? 2-base all ins are quite forseeable and can be hold when scouted quite easily + having to all in every game on maps like neo planet s is really great..... wtf
On April 26 2013 11:26 BiG wrote: i dont get why people want balanced or near-balanced maps removed... daybreak was a perfectly fine map, now we get klontas for it? yeah great.
seriously how is there supposed to be any map-balance, when ppl always cry about wanting to have "innovative" maps, which just favor some race in some matchups quite heavily.
Because having the same map in the pool for 19482934829345 months gets reaaaaaaaaally boring.
On April 26 2013 11:26 BiG wrote: i dont get why people want balanced or near-balanced maps removed... daybreak was a perfectly fine map, now we get klontas for it? yeah great.
seriously how is there supposed to be any map-balance, when ppl always cry about wanting to have "innovative" maps, which just favor some race in some matchups quite heavily.
Because having the same map in the pool for 19482934829345 months gets reaaaaaaaaally boring.
not for me + having bad maps is really great for esports, right?
On April 26 2013 11:26 BiG wrote: i dont get why people want balanced or near-balanced maps removed... daybreak was a perfectly fine map, now we get klontas for it? yeah great.
seriously how is there supposed to be any map-balance, when ppl always cry about wanting to have "innovative" maps, which just favor some race in some matchups quite heavily.
Because having the same map in the pool for 19482934829345 months gets reaaaaaaaaally boring.
not for me + having bad maps is really great for esports, right?
Most people like variety. Doing the same thing gets really old after a while. Also, I love people calling a map bad without having even had any games played on it yet...lol. Armchair mapmakers here in this thread
On April 26 2013 11:28 Qwyn wrote: Well, these maps are all easily downvotes for me (except for the space platform one, maybe - I'd prefer that over Shit Station). What the fuck has gotten into their heads that they make 3 bases (and even 4 on that Zerus map) so fucking easy to take.
Really Blizzard?
When are you going to let the community make all the ladder maps? This is just another disappointment.
because its incredibly bad for toss to have 3rds which are not defendable? 2-base all ins are quite forseeable and can be hold when scouted quite easily + having to all in every game on maps like neo planet s is really great..... wtf
There's a difference between a map with balanced 3rd base and derp automatic 3rd bases.
Why can't Blizzard sync the ladder map pool with the tournament map pool? Why does there have to be a separate set of maps for ladder? Does anyone involved with maps at Blizzard have even slightest clue what they are doing?
It's so goddamn frustrating and such an easy, simple fix.
Love the looks of the new maps. Don't know why people are instantly hating on Green Goo LE, other than it being a little bland, it looks like a fun map that will foster some innovative play and/or games.
Klontas Mire looks absolutely awful, Blizzard promoting the current ladder fashion for 2-base all-ins again. And why remove Daybreak, it was a great map at pretty much all stages of the game. Sad that we still don't really have any long-term balanced maps that can stay on the ladder for more than a few seasons, but then we don't even have a properly balanced game yet (and won't until Legacy of the Void meta stabilises) so I guess we're at the whim of Blizzard on this.
On April 26 2013 11:26 BiG wrote: i dont get why people want balanced or near-balanced maps removed... daybreak was a perfectly fine map, now we get klontas for it? yeah great.
seriously how is there supposed to be any map-balance, when ppl always cry about wanting to have "innovative" maps, which just favor some race in some matchups quite heavily.
Because having the same map in the pool for 19482934829345 months gets reaaaaaaaaally boring.
not for me + having bad maps is really great for esports, right?
You don't know the map is bad yet, you arent an expert.
The variety is good for the ladder and good for the esports scene in general because it provides variety for the viewer.
You can always tell the WC3 players by their desire to play the same map for a decade.
These map changes look nice. Klontas Mire instantly looks like the weird one but I'm actually excited to immediately try some builds that ought to work better on it than on a typical map.
On April 26 2013 11:57 NonY wrote: You can always tell the WC3 players by their desire to play the same map for a decade.
These map changes look nice. Klontas Mire instantly looks like the weird one but I'm actually excited to immediately try some builds that ought to work better on it than on a typical map.
Ah yes, I hadn't considered the Warcraft 3 variable. Such a shame that map pool has literally NEVER changed since the game's launch.
On April 26 2013 12:10 Gfire wrote: I can't even imagine what it would be like to look at Klontas Mire and think it looks like Scrap Station... Why are so many people saying that?
On April 26 2013 12:10 Gfire wrote: I can't even imagine what it would be like to look at Klontas Mire and think it looks like Scrap Station... Why are so many people saying that?
On April 26 2013 12:10 Gfire wrote: I can't even imagine what it would be like to look at Klontas Mire and think it looks like Scrap Station... Why are so many people saying that?
Rush Distance.
It's actually the opposite. The rush distance is short on Klontas and long on Scrap. ...
Derelict Watcher: Solid map, pretty standard but actually not bad. Area right outside the nat and 3rd looks a little too open, 3rd is rather close and I'd rather there be a 2nd entrance so you actually have to move your army to defend your 3rd, but this flaw isn't anything new. Also Blizzard needs to stop using 3-width ramps as nat chokes, they're so incredibly awkward to wall.
Klontas Mire: Concept is interesting, but 3rd base definitely sucks for Z.
Zerus Prime = Shakuras Plateau: Uber 9 Base Split-Map Maximum Turtle Edition
TvP on Zerus is going to suuuuuuuuuck. Call me what you want, but I won't be playing a single 1v1 on that map. Lucky for me, I had korhal and newkirk veto'd so I get 2 vetos back =D
BW had Troy, Neo Ground Zero, Ride of Valkyries, Alternative off the top of my head- they were different but they still played well. There was also dumb shit like Flight-Dreamliner, Paranoid Android, Sidewinder, and Space Madness, but for the most part, they weren't actually placed in the ladder pool...
Two of my vetoes are gone, and replaced with only that icky green map as something to be vetoed. How nice. Now I can happily veto Star Station and not feel like I am being punished for doing so.
That Protoss themed map looks really good. Not really splittable and thirds that aren't ridiculous to take. It also looks like Blink all-ins may not be that good on it, which is a plus in my books.
That Zerus map looks interesting. I am concerned it may be a little easy to split but other than that it looks good to me.
Edit: Nevermind, I am not vetoing Klontas. 3gate robo immortal/sentry with mothership core support will be godlike on that map. 2gating Zergs from my own base will be good too!!! Bring back the Steppes of War builds! Wooooooooo
First map is decent, but i would invert the middle to make a longer rush distance Second map is going to be fun to watch, but the rush distance ground/air is way too short lol... I would be surprised if this map make it to major tournament. The third map is a boring split map, cant wait to watch 1hour+ TvT
I thumbs up everything as soon as a i saw that daybreak was taken out -__- but seriously they look really good. Zerus looks like it might have some of the terran divide-the-map-in-half-and-its-over but aside from that they look really unique and are refreshing compared to what we have been seeing :D
On April 26 2013 12:39 Dreamer.T wrote: All the new 1v1 maps are cool except for Klontas. Don't see that being good for Zergs or terrans in tvp. Way too many tight corriders.
On April 26 2013 12:39 Dreamer.T wrote: All the new 1v1 maps are cool except for Klontas. Don't see that being good for Zergs or terrans in tvp. Way too many tight corriders.
Protoss needs all the help it can get right now
yeah, well then they shouldn't have designed the race to be an impy fucking deathball
Klontas looks like it will be dominated by Terran to me. But overall I am pretty happy. Although erelict Watcher TE looks like the most generic map ever created. Edit: I am so sick of shared base 2v2 maps. 2v2 was so much more fun in BW when you had totally separate bases and you constantly were forced to asses incoming attacks to figure out of you should save your ally or counter attack an opponent.
1v1: It is sad to see Daybreak go, it was the best map ever in SC2. 2v2: THe Boneyard should stay, it is funny as hell map which created a lot of funny games.
First map looks pretty good for turtling. First three bases can all be covered easily by standing outside the natural, and even the 4th and 5th only add one additional attack path. I think we'll be seeing a lot of stalemate games on this map.
Second map is trash. I do like the idea of having super narrow pathways like that one (or that Kespa map that had one ringing the entire map's edge or something like that), but not that close. Unfortunately, it only really makes sense to have a feature like that to shorten rush distances, and being able to "proxy" 2 barracks in your natural and have it probably be as close as proxying across another map is just not balanced at all.
Third map looks interesting, but could end up really bad. It's kinda hard to see how big it is from the screenshot. I think there could be some potential for taking that frontmost base (intended as a 4th) as a 3rd or even as your natural. Either way, it's basically going to be a guaranteed 4 bases, which isn't particularly enticing to me.
Though I know there's gonna be some cheesy and annoying stuff on Klontas Mire, I'm glad they are experimenting and getting a bit more adventurous with their maps
That mire map, I love new innovative game flow ideas for maps...not oh we made a short rush distance which we know to be broken as balls in certain match ups.
Blizzard 'but that passage is so small they can't possibly rush many units!' Anyone with common sense 'So how's that stop a fast 2 rax from their base?'
So much negativity on Klontas when we haven't really tried it yet and haven't seen any features like it before. Could be interesting or could be terrible. I'll wait until I play it to judge.
On April 26 2013 10:20 splico wrote: Newkirk rocked. Remove star station rather. Now we got new antiga and new scrap station. YAY.
You read my mind. The first two maps remind me so much of Antiga and Scrap Station.
Also Newkirk is a lot better than Star Station. It is impossible to take a 3rd on Star Station PvZ, but Newkirk provides opportunities for macro play and is a pretty unique map.
On Klontas, if you send a probe at the start of the game it gets to your opponent natural in time for an 8 pylon. If you rally your first built probe it is a 9 pylon. The natural is 8 tiles wide so can be fully walled by a pylon and 2 gateways. You can even place the pylon against a wall so that it has less surface area for drones to hit. I am not sure how viable this will actually be against a player who pulls enough drones, but if the zerg does not pull drones before the gateways are started it could be amusing.
Edit, 8 pylon starts the second gateway at 1:45, 9 or 10 pylon at 1:50. 10 pylon gate gate seems the best way as you also have the least wait time between starting the pylon and the second gate (less time for them to pull drones). If you prefer you can wall it to the bottom of the ramp instead, but i dont see why you would do this.
Considering how close the bases are I think they should make the natural choke one space wider to prevent this.
I don't care how long a map is in the map pool, as long as it's good. Get rid of the internet! Removing daybreak but keeping star station is another amazing decision by blizzard. Really hard call. I'd like to see a contest, "who can make a map worse than star station." I'd just like to see if it could be done. Would really take some talent.
Omg guys, I had used 2 of my vetos on Korhal City and Newkirk mostly because I found them ugly and tileset depressing to play on. (please tell me someone else feels this way and I'm not completely insane)
I might only use 1 veto next season and have more gameplay variety! (might veto Klontas but maybe it might be a good troll map for gameplay variety. I really like the lack of Xel'Nagas, I think that's a big part of the reason I like Neo Planet S so much)
Klontas Mire - they could have just called it Neo Scrap Station, haha. Looks like it will either be a fantastic offbeat map, or a horrible one-season wonder à la Searing Crater.
Zerus Prime's aesthetics are sick. Look at those lavafalls!
OLD maps: (2)Daybreak Yes to long this map deny my win ratio cause canon cheeses proxy two gate etc YES! (2)Newkirk Precinct I think this is fail cause If they add GSL version its pretty exciting map to play definetly better than Klotas mire NO! (4)Korhal City 4gate blink op here vs terran most of the times so definetly yes remove.......YES
So score is 2:1 for blizz this time .
NEW maps: (4)Zerus Prime TE- looks pretty balanced for all matchups. YES! (2)Derelict Watcher TE - vs mech play of terran looks u can leave your base on the ground so pretty unbalanced and chessy cause cliffs near expand.....NO! (2)Derelict Watcher TE - i only hate these xelnagas and maybe mid proportions neeeds little changes to balance all matchups but looks ok for me . YES
Again 2:1 for blizzz. This time blizz won change in 1v1 maps. (btw 2v2 i cant have opinion cause i dont play 2v2
finally daybreak is gone!!! Wow really liking all the new maps!! Even klontas mire because it will create crazy fun games. And i don't get why people are comparing it to scrap station, starting positions are similar but its a whole lote different.
Also they should take out akilon rather than newkirk
I'm mixed on Klontas. On one way, the rush distance and the general layout of the map is ugly. But this tiny path is new, so I guess I will test it and veto it when I will be 0-5 :D
Haha, Klontas Mire = Scrap Station 2.0. I really like the look of Zerus Prime in terms of the lava and trees. Although seems like a really strong zerg map. Overall nice to have a change, only thing I would have wanted is Star Station being removed too.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
Zerus prime is kinda reminiscent of Shakuras Plateau, albeit better. Is certainly looks prone to split map scenarios. Imagine planetaries, WM, and sieges at the middle. But since it's bigger, I bet nydus will be stronger than on Shakuras, and skytoss should be able to break it.
On April 26 2013 12:37 [Erasmus] wrote: daybreak is overdue for retirement... but there 0 excuses for removing it while trash like star station are still in the map pool and not removed.
Personally I think Star Station is not that bad. The only problem is IMO that there are 4 watch towers and too few paths that can not be seen.
On April 26 2013 13:55 hzflank wrote: On Klontas, if you send a probe at the start of the game it gets to your opponent natural in time for an 8 pylon. If you rally your first built probe it is a 9 pylon. The natural is 8 tiles wide so can be fully walled by a pylon and 2 gateways. You can even place the pylon against a wall so that it has less surface area for drones to hit. I am not sure how viable this will actually be against a player who pulls enough drones, but if the zerg does not pull drones before the gateways are started it could be amusing.
Edit, 8 pylon starts the second gateway at 1:45, 9 or 10 pylon at 1:50. 10 pylon gate gate seems the best way as you also have the least wait time between starting the pylon and the second gate (less time for them to pull drones). If you prefer you can wall it to the bottom of the ramp instead, but i dont see why you would do this.
Considering how close the bases are I think they should make the natural choke one space wider to prevent this.
You have to remember that it is also a good 7 pool map. If both players cheese the Z will win.
Finally no more Daybreak! Was really getting sick of that map by now... Klontas Mire TE reminds me way too much of Scrap Station. *shudder* But hey... it's HotS... so who knows, I guess...
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
That's fine, of course we should have a map rotation that moves faster than leaving a map in for more than a year. That doesn't absolve the new "TE!!!!" Blizzard maps from coming up utterly short as replacements for a map like Daybreak.
Just as an example, we have tons of maps here in the custom map forum that would be suitable to fill the role: "We're pulling Daybreak and we need a similar map to fill that slot." Like this one, as one of many I could point to.
Or, if we just need more variety, there are tons of other maps that work for that too! It's possible to have a fresh experience on a competitively robust map. But these Blizzard maps are not even close to that goal.
The good thing is that at least the release of these maps seems to acknowledge (dimly) that it is a goal, I guess? They are a small step towards what we should have had years ago now: regular rotation into new and exciting balanced ladder maps that interface with tournament usage.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
first off, back in the day we didn't even know how to play the game right. Now that we do lets see what small maps can lead to. Plus its just one in the map pool.
What do you mean people are not into giving something new a try, have you even watch pro league? lol people have been praising all the new maps kespa have been throwing out there, and its honestly really refreshing to see blizzard give it a try as well. Stop being so narrow minded
Edit: the more i look at that map the more pumped i get, its so neat, ive always wanted a little bridge as well thats so cool that map is going to be great, mark my words.
Too bad they remove korhal & daybreak. I loved both of them. But newkirk was practically unplayable as a protoss. The new maps look pretty good so far, but (2)Klontas Mire TE is an absolute no-go.
As a mech only player I really like the look of everyone of those new maps. Finally a few maps with some chokes I can actually defend against zerg and bio terran! :D
Also thank god Daybreak is gone. I've been vetoing that map for at least a year, such a terrible map.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
Or, if we just need more variety, there are tons of other maps that work for that too!
Any kind of map that adds variety (ie: is a bit different from the standard) is always greeted by a whinefest. Especially if a standard strat wouldn't be great on the map and you would need to, heaven forbid, use another strat.
Btw am I the only one who never vetos maps and just try to make the best of every map?
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
Or, if we just need more variety, there are tons of other maps that work for that too!
Any kind of map that adds variety (ie: is a bit different from the standard) is always greeted by a whinefest. Especially if a standard strat wouldn't be great on the map and you would need to, heaven forbid, use another strat.
Btw am I the only one who never vetos maps and just try to make the best of every map?
I do that as well but I almost vetoed Daybreak at the start of HotS. I'm so glad this map is finally gone.
I won't judge the new maps just yet, I'll have to play them a few times in every matchup first. They are looking kinda different, which is nice already and if they really improved them with the help of good Proleague and GSL map makers then that's great as well
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
Or, if we just need more variety, there are tons of other maps that work for that too!
Any kind of map that adds variety (ie: is a bit different from the standard) is always greeted by a whinefest. Especially if a standard strat wouldn't be great on the map and you would need to, heaven forbid, use another strat.
Btw am I the only one who never vetos maps and just try to make the best of every map?
You should be careful to delineate the forces at play in the community when it comes to map reception.
Who is whining about maps? Is it viewers? It is casual ladderers? Is it hardcore ladderers? Is it pros? Is it tournaments? Is it mapmakers?
And if the answer is yes to any of those questions, who is responsible?
One thing I've noticed is Derelict Watcher is literally Daybreak but better. It's Daybreak without the complete and utter terrible Narrowness and it's not going to be great for pure split map scenarios. The base layouts are pretty much the same but there's much more room to move around and there's actually a choice of what expansions to take (either top or bottom respectively).
That's quite possibly going to be 10 times better than daybreak ever was.
These look cool, admit klontas at first sight looked ugly, i was like what the fuck, thumbs down but on closer inspection it intrigues me with the narrow bridge, no xel'naga etc Derelict looks solid and fun and can see a wide variety of games on there. Zerus Prime intrigues me too, can see zerg gobbling up bases, doing nydus play, even doing drops.
Hope people actually play the maps, and not just a couple times with bias and being like lol this is horrible wtf blizzard. Maybe some of them are bad, but you don't know until you actually put some volume into them and play them with an open mind. These plus tl map contest means should be some new blood and the good maps will rise to the top, I'm cool with a few failed experiments along the way.
On April 26 2013 16:57 Qikz wrote: One thing I've noticed is Derelict Watcher is literally Daybreak but better. It's Daybreak without the complete and utter terrible Narrowness and it's not going to be great for pure split map scenarios. The base layouts are pretty much the same but there's much more room to move around and there's actually a choice of what expansions to take (either top or bottom respectively).
That's quite possibly going to be 10 times better than daybreak ever was.
It's almost totally different than Daybreak, it's not really worth comparing them as similar. In terms of how it will play, it will be almost opposite since there's very little you can do positionally without already being in the lead.
There are tons of people in the community who make maps, there are fucking professionals in korea who do it, and you still let your interns make shitty maps? What the fuck blizzard. I like the 3 you removed (though precinct is used in a lot of tournaments so wtf guys, if you don't care about that remove star station because that map is actually terrible), but why the fuck can't you just let our community make maps instead of producing shit yourself? The star station tileset one looks decent, the other two like somebody took a dumb in the editor and formed a symmetrical piece of crap.
I don't like any of them honestly, the PL version of Newkirk looked fine to me, strange to see that that one didn't get tested.
Klontas Mire TE How are you supposed to take a battle? You have to go all the way around, creating a split map or you can gamble and go for a all in doom drop? Exposes your mining bases for their army meh..
Derelict Watcher TE Maybe it's just me but it looks way too open. Good luck Protoss taking a 3rd.
Zerus Prime TE Very easy to take bases, create split map with such a narrow middle. Didn't Blizzard learn from Newkirk?
All in all, there are way better community maps that could have been picked instead of these.
On April 08 2013 18:23 Grumbels wrote: Imo, it's a good thing that some of the new maps are named after areas prominent in the campaign. (Korhal floating island) I think they also should have a map with the Zerus theme, and in general they should be making references to the campaign even in the maps, for instance with Mengsk statues and whatnot. I think that's more engaging and memorable for casual viewers.
Yay, I guess Blizzard had the same idea I had. ^_^
Like Derelict Watcher and am ok-ish with Zerus. However I HATE everything about Klontas Mire. That one seems like an early 2011 map in both visuals and layout.
Daybreak was fine in my opinion even though it got repetitive. It's still arguably the best SC2 map tied with Cloud Kingdom in my book. I'd rather have seen Star Station kick the bucket.
New maps look pretty sick. Went into this thread with low expectations but I'm really ahppy with these changes seeing as I Newkirk and Korhal vetoed anyway.
About time Daybreak was put out to pasture. Although I wouldn't be surprised if it did a Metalopolis and came back again. Korhal is a good removal as well, since PvP just wasn't an option on that map. I'm actually a little sad to see Newkirk go as I have a ridiculously high 79% winrate on that map. I'm still a little confused as to why tournaments (including GSL) seem so happy to use Star Station. I would've been very happy to see that map go too, but at least I have no shortage of vetos.
lol, having a good look at Klontas Mire. Realistically which Zerg wouldn’t 6/8/10 pool against Protoss on that map? And in PvT all Terran has to do is mine up that walkway to deter Protoss (not that they need to since Protoss use Pylons anyway). Yet Protoss has to continuously live in fear of a 3:30 attack. I’ll give it a try but it looks like an instant veto to me.
On April 26 2013 17:39 Greendotz wrote: lol, having a good look at Klontas Mire. Realistically which Zerg wouldn’t 6/8/10 pool against Protoss on that map? And in PvT all Terran has to do is mine up that walkway to deter Protoss (not that they need to since Protoss use Pylons anyway). Yet Protoss has to continuously live in fear of a 3:30 attack. I’ll give it a try but it looks like an instant veto to me.
Honestly that is more realistic in TvZ, in TvP I really wouldn't rely on a few mines. If anything I would think that ridge is mainly a problem for zerg. Both toss and terran have long-range AOE weapons that will easily deal with any serious army trying to pass there. And zerg of course has infestors that also will deal easily with it, but they aren't very popular atm.
And I would imagine a toss can also pressure a zerg quite early via that path.
On April 26 2013 17:39 Greendotz wrote: lol, having a good look at Klontas Mire. Realistically which Zerg wouldn’t 6/8/10 pool against Protoss on that map? And in PvT all Terran has to do is mine up that walkway to deter Protoss (not that they need to since Protoss use Pylons anyway). Yet Protoss has to continuously live in fear of a 3:30 attack. I’ll give it a try but it looks like an instant veto to me.
Honestly that is more realistic in TvZ, in TvP I really wouldn't rely on a few mines. If anything I would think that ridge is mainly a problem for zerg. Both toss and terran have long-range AOE weapons that will easily deal with any serious army trying to pass there. And zerg of course has infestors that also will deal easily with it, but they aren't very popular atm.
And I would imagine a toss can also pressure a zerg quite early via that path.
Well you know wouldn't it be cool if they came back into style? But only for specific maps? Tbh I'm getting kind of sick of seeing Z build muta in all 3 MU.
On April 26 2013 17:39 Greendotz wrote: lol, having a good look at Klontas Mire. Realistically which Zerg wouldn’t 6/8/10 pool against Protoss on that map? And in PvT all Terran has to do is mine up that walkway to deter Protoss (not that they need to since Protoss use Pylons anyway). Yet Protoss has to continuously live in fear of a 3:30 attack. I’ll give it a try but it looks like an instant veto to me.
Honestly that is more realistic in TvZ, in TvP I really wouldn't rely on a few mines. If anything I would think that ridge is mainly a problem for zerg. Both toss and terran have long-range AOE weapons that will easily deal with any serious army trying to pass there. And zerg of course has infestors that also will deal easily with it, but they aren't very popular atm.
And I would imagine a toss can also pressure a zerg quite early via that path.
On April 26 2013 17:24 Tobblish wrote: Zerus Prime TE Very easy to take bases, create split map with such a narrow middle. Didn't Blizzard learn from Newkirk?
Shakuras - 6 bases per side (and two middle bases) Newkirk - 7 bases per side Daybreak - 6 bases per side Metropolis - 5 bases per side, 2 middle bases (and island bases, which rarely came into play) Zerus Prime - 9 bases per side.
I wonder if having more bases in a split map situation will make them play out more interestingly.
I think we shouldn't judge Klontas Mire too quickly just because it's a bit different. That bridge (blockable in the middle by 1 Pylon, or 2 Pylons at the end points) will probably create some pretty unique situations and it's not really a reliable rush path anyway considering your enemy can either block it or just create a massive concave at the end point. Though to be honest I don't really like the rest of its layout either but let's see some games on it first ^_^
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
On April 26 2013 13:55 hzflank wrote: On Klontas, if you send a probe at the start of the game it gets to your opponent natural in time for an 8 pylon. If you rally your first built probe it is a 9 pylon. The natural is 8 tiles wide so can be fully walled by a pylon and 2 gateways. You can even place the pylon against a wall so that it has less surface area for drones to hit. I am not sure how viable this will actually be against a player who pulls enough drones, but if the zerg does not pull drones before the gateways are started it could be amusing.
Edit, 8 pylon starts the second gateway at 1:45, 9 or 10 pylon at 1:50. 10 pylon gate gate seems the best way as you also have the least wait time between starting the pylon and the second gate (less time for them to pull drones). If you prefer you can wall it to the bottom of the ramp instead, but i dont see why you would do this.
Considering how close the bases are I think they should make the natural choke one space wider to prevent this.
You have to remember that it is also a good 7 pool map. If both players cheese the Z will win.
well that changes everything. Now, as a zerg, Im incredibly excited for the new maps T.T
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
let me rephrase it (I hate whirlwind because of it size and how hard it is to lock it down) people enjoy splitmaps.
edit: WW is such a riddicilous map in some matchups due to its size, Daybreak is fine due to the fact that one could both play Macro games as well as 2base pushes as well as splitmaps and it is one of the better maps when it comes to balance against cheeses and drop-play.
Daybreak, I will choose to remember you for the map that you were the first few months of your existence where you always delivered the best games instead of a map that turned really stale by the end.
Also is it bad that I was 100% sure where mains where on Klontas at first look because they seemed so weird? Still I don't know why all the early hate for it when its clearly trying out something interesting and seeing how it works. It reminds me a little of the KeSPA map that tried the same thing.
i dont really like these maps but im happy they are trying new stuff because hots has become stale for me. But they should had kept daybreak just because its still the best overall map.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
let me rephrase it (I hate whirlwind because of it size and how hard it is to lock it down) people enjoy splitmaps.
edit: WW is such a riddicilous map in some matchups due to its size, Daybreak is fine due to the fact that one could both play Macro games as well as 2base pushes as well as splitmaps and it is one of the better maps when it comes to balance against cheeses and drop-play.
^This is my opinion.
The only thing Daybreak was leading to after the first months of its existence was the same game every time, it was balanced yes, but it sure as hell wasn't fun.
Split map scenarios are just plain boring, especially in TvT.
On April 26 2013 10:45 Aelonius wrote: Klontas Mire TE effectively shuts down any chance for Zerg to get a decent economy early on (2 base) without overly committing in units in ZvP. Veto #1.
Zerus Prime TE, I really really hate the single choke play which forces Zerg to waltz into a choke, or play mutalisks. Either way, single spot to engage with ground is not favourable, veto #2.
You can also uses drops, something forgotten or use Nydus worms to go around, your opponent won't have 50% of the map with vision. There are other options.
True, I can use drops but they are countered more easily than a T drop for example. So it's more of a gamble imho on such a map. As for nydus, any good player would see the nydus and adjust beforehand
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
let me rephrase it (I hate whirlwind because of it size and how hard it is to lock it down) people enjoy splitmaps.
edit: WW is such a riddicilous map in some matchups due to its size, Daybreak is fine due to the fact that one could both play Macro games as well as 2base pushes as well as splitmaps and it is one of the better maps when it comes to balance against cheeses and drop-play.
^This is my opinion.
The only thing Daybreak was leading to after the first months of its existence was the same game every time, it was balanced yes, but it sure as hell wasn't fun.
Split map scenarios are just plain boring, especially in TvT.
Again, opinions. I personally (and I'm sure others would agree) find positional TvT in the lategame incredibly interesting to watch, as it taxes a player's game sense and decision making as much as their mechanics, something most players at the top level are all generally decent with. Some people like IdrA love 20 minute no rush macro games. Some people like 8-9 minute timings/all-ins. Neither is more "correct" in what they enjoy, but Daybreak saw just as much of the latter as the former and to suggest otherwise is silly.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
let me rephrase it (I hate whirlwind because of it size and how hard it is to lock it down) people enjoy splitmaps.
edit: WW is such a riddicilous map in some matchups due to its size, Daybreak is fine due to the fact that one could both play Macro games as well as 2base pushes as well as splitmaps and it is one of the better maps when it comes to balance against cheeses and drop-play.
^This is my opinion.
The only thing Daybreak was leading to after the first months of its existence was the same game every time, it was balanced yes, but it sure as hell wasn't fun.
Split map scenarios are just plain boring, especially in TvT.
Again, opinions. I personally (and I'm sure others would agree) find positional TvT in the lategame incredibly interesting to watch, as it taxes a player's game sense and decision making as much as their mechanics, something most players at the top level are all generally decent with. Some people like IdrA love 20 minute no rush macro games. Some people like 8-9 minute timings/all-ins. Neither is more "correct" in what they enjoy, but Daybreak saw just as much of the latter as the former and to suggest otherwise is silly.
Opinions, I know, I knew someone would comment on that point if I replied to that post. -.-
I'm saying that lategame Daybreak is the same no matter what, there is no differentiation between games, and positional TvT != split map TvT, split map TvT implies PF and turrets where it becomes a stalemate of Tanks, PFs and turrets, which isn't fun.
On April 26 2013 19:36 Nekovivie wrote: Finally Daybreak is gone, fuck me that was getting so stale to watch.
How about Blizzard hire some map makers to make decent maps? It's been fucking three years since this game was released and still turds like klontas mire show up.
Another solution would be to ask for the community's opinion on the maps before deciding what to install in the map pool.
On April 26 2013 16:00 conut wrote: dude all these maps look sick, and for people complaining about that one map, LETS GIVE SOMETHING NEW A TRYYYYY i can see some goofy crazy fun matches
Funnily enough, people aren't big on "goofy" and "giving something new a try" when it involves maps that look like a return to the dark days of Scrap Station, Steppes of War and Xel'naga Caverns. Daybreak was great because it lent itself both to 2-base play and more long-term macro games, especially now in HotS (so far). That it's been axed and replaced with macro-oriented maps and Scrap Station Mk. 2 is kinda depressing.
Daybreak also creates the most boring split-map turtle games in existence, just go check out Hasuobs' winning games in WCS EU against Bly and Happy.
Most people are just tired of that map anyway, time to move on.
thats your opinion, many players enjoy macro maps.
There are macro maps and then there are boring split map maps. Newkirk/daybreak are 2 maps that lead to lots of split map situations which are pretty boring.
A good macro map would be a map like whirlwind where it's not a map where you can get into a split map scenario because it's so big and lots of places to attack from.
let me rephrase it (I hate whirlwind because of it size and how hard it is to lock it down) people enjoy splitmaps.
edit: WW is such a riddicilous map in some matchups due to its size, Daybreak is fine due to the fact that one could both play Macro games as well as 2base pushes as well as splitmaps and it is one of the better maps when it comes to balance against cheeses and drop-play.
^This is my opinion.
The only thing Daybreak was leading to after the first months of its existence was the same game every time, it was balanced yes, but it sure as hell wasn't fun.
Split map scenarios are just plain boring, especially in TvT.
thats your opinion... stop trying to show of your personal opinion as a general opinion, which is why Im talking about MY personal opinion.
The huge issue daybreak had was the fact once people took the middle bases, there was literally no way to punish any form of expanding due to how narrow it is.
It's also one of the leading reasons to Skytoss and Broodlord Infestor(this was in WoL) being so broken is because they've got a slow ass army and you can't do anything to punish it as there's so few attack routes.
This new map with Daybreak style expansion pattern has loads more attack routes and it's going to be a lot more fun to watch and play postionally than Daybreak ever was. You'll be able to punish a slow army by mass expanding and you'll be able to actually attack and deny their far bases since they have a long distance to travel.
Also why are people claiming it'll be hard to take a third on the star station tileset map? There's literally a ramp right outside your natural ramp in to it and no other entrance. If you can't defend that, then you're seriously in trouble.
I will miss Newkirk. Personally, that map was a pleasure to play on, and didn't have many problems at all (not that I'm aware of). Daybreak, while a good map, has run its course.
Maps 2 and 3 look like Terran/medivac play and maybe oracles as well will be very strong, due to either short air distances with some spanws, and large areas of empty air space nowhere near land.
On April 26 2013 18:29 Sated wrote: Wow, Blizzard actually making some decent maps. I don't even dislike the one getting so many Thumbs Down that much, though it would be a lot better without that tiny pathway. I guess the good thing is that moving an army along there is going to be suicide against an opponent who is waiting for you at the other end, so it encourages people to be more active in taking map control.
The removal of Daybreak and Korhal City also gives me two vetoes to work with! Yay!
EDIT:
In reference to the above post, my third veto is Whirlwind. Maps that size are ridiculous and simply shouldn't exist. They're silly.
Are you crazy o_O
Whirlwind always give the best sc2 matches o_o' lot of paths, counter-attacks available, xel naga not covering too much space...
Sad to see Daybreak go Newkirk Precinct was actually pretty fun too
The new maps, I mean, they are probably all gonna be interesting to try and play.
Just judging from gut feeling / my stubborn preference of the same map over and over, the second map looks really weird and the third looks too big. But I like to test new maps and they all have a really cool look
On April 26 2013 18:29 Sated wrote: Wow, Blizzard actually making some decent maps. I don't even dislike the one getting so many Thumbs Down that much, though it would be a lot better without that tiny pathway. I guess the good thing is that moving an army along there is going to be suicide against an opponent who is waiting for you at the other end, so it encourages people to be more active in taking map control.
The removal of Daybreak and Korhal City also gives me two vetoes to work with! Yay!
EDIT:
In reference to the above post, my third veto is Whirlwind. Maps that size are ridiculous and simply shouldn't exist. They're silly.
Are you crazy o_O
Whirlwind always give the best sc2 matches o_o' lot of paths, counter-attacks available, xel naga not covering too much space...
What paths? There is just one massive open space. The fact that there are two entrances to the expansion isn't really pathways for counter attacks. The map is just so ridiculously big which I feel force player down certain predictable pathways alot yet still some of them seem abit too strong. Would much rather see Whirlwind go than Daybreak or Newkirk. That being said, It's kinda ok that we only have one big annoying map, but the new third map seems pretty big too. But this is just my opinion
I think when you compare Daybreak to that Starstation map, it's the lesser of two evils. However Cloud Kingdom, is even better. Good new maps overall, it's nice to see experimental maps too.
The meta for such a small rush distance simply does not exist. So I don't want to go all 'Broken!' and 'IMBA!!#!', but as far as I remmber from the early days of 'steppes of war' Zerg doesn't do that great in those scenrios. But that was a LONG time ago, and even thou HotS didn't change zergs early game we do have very diffrent queens and unit and building timings are diffrent now.
I'm actually for it, I just hope they throw a balance test version before they put it into the pool so we can fool around with it and see if it's actually still broken to have such close spawns. This is the one place I would add a new kind of destructiable terrain ( the bridge itself ) allowing one player to actually destory the bridge in mid-game.
(4)Geosync Quarry looks to be quite shitty. I guess it is interesting with startpositions far away from the ramp but it looks horribly broken and is also a "fortress/shared" map so it cant possibly be good.
On April 26 2013 21:50 Cereb wrote: Sad to see Daybreak go
As a player I am kind of sad.
As a spectator FUCK YEAH!
Hehe yeah, we've seen some reeaaally boring games in wcs Europe qual the last few days on that map, though I do feel it was abit the players "fault" more than the map, but good points still
Klontas... I'm still trying to find a spawning position. Pretty sure they didn't post the whole mappicture, right? Zoomed in a little too much when making that screenshot and cut off the starting positions. Yeah, that's what must have happened.
So we get rid of Daybreak: cause its old as hell Newkirk: cause force split map is boring as hell Korhal city: cause its jusn awful
Then we add in Map1: good Map2: scrap station 2.0 Map3: an even LARGER map with only ONE attack path that is EVEN smaller than newkirk... which will force split map situations...
just wondering why blizzard are not creating maps with the higher grounds near expos and mineral lines (e.g. smth similar to Lost Temple broodwar maps) to be able to drop tanks, mines there, use collosi, templars, spine crawlers, etc)? is the game that imbalanced that they think it will be hardly possible to defend this?
On April 26 2013 22:06 Rosettastoned wrote: So we get rid of Daybreak: cause its old as hell Newkirk: cause force split map is boring as hell Korhal city: cause its jusn awful
Then we add in Map1: good Map2: scrap station 2.0 Map3: an even LARGER map with only ONE attack path that is EVEN smaller than newkirk... which will force split map situations...
Well map 1 seems to be their: use all knowledge gathered to create a balanced map fitting into the current trends. Map2 is an experimental map. No watch tower and pathway that not every unit can pass it seems like Map3 is the hello low level players, play this map to enjoy huge fights. (since they removed the old one they need a new one, we will always have a map like this in the Ladder, thats why thee are Vetos afterall, so they can do maps like this for lower levels)
So pretty much matches the pattern when Blizzard adds maps to the pool, unless they don't have time or do community maps.
On April 26 2013 22:25 asti009asti wrote: just wondering why blizzard are not creating maps with the higher grounds near expos and mineral lines (e.g. smth similar to Lost Temple broodwar maps) to be able to drop tanks, mines there, use collosi, templars, spine crawlers, etc)? is the game that imbalanced that they think it will be hardly possible to defend this?
Siege Tanks are fine, but Thors there pose a problem because they have damn good anti air for the time you can hit and outrange most stuff on the ground as well. But it would be possible if you avoid to put something there into thors range. (or the whole ledge in range of multiple spines) We had stuff like this on later bases but often it were half islands reachable by ground and they were used alot. Fell out a bit of style though on recent maps.
what.... klontas and zerus both have a back entrance to the natural? two maps that are straight up horrible in PvZ due to one stupid design choice? WHY?
I voted thumbs up to map removal, but I felt the need to say that I will miss daybreak and I reading this thread I see I am not alone on this. It was an old tired map, but I felt that there still are many good games played on it and it was balanced as well as any map out there. Other than this I love all these changes. Maybe we should have a #savedaybreak campaign?
Removing daybreak makes me sad. The first map seems ok but the second one wow that looks like a nightmare for ZvZ and its already such a rush based match up in HoTS because people all in if they don't want to go muta vs muta, plus early pools look like they would be super good. As for the other two id have to play on them to get an opinion but the third one looks like its really easy to get expansions as a protoss or terran and I really don't like maps where they can get 3 base uncontested. Plus the filtering all of the bases into the middle makes it really hard to attack if they zone out that area with tanks or mass mines and slow push you to death.
On April 26 2013 23:06 StreetWise wrote: I voted thumbs up to map removal, but I felt the need to say that I will miss daybreak and I reading this thread I see I am not alone on this. It was an old tired map, but I felt that there still are many good games played on it and it was balanced as well as any map out there. Other than this I love all these changes. Maybe we should have a #savedaybreak campaign?
You mean like when everybody demanded Metalopolis back and immediately regretted it? :D
I dont like (2)Klontas Mire TE. It encourages Cheese to much and its very broken with the current STate of medivac drops since the distance is so close would much rather have all Tourny maps rather than random maps made by blizzard.
On April 26 2013 21:51 IcemanAsi wrote: Mire is, intresting?
The meta for such a small rush distance simply does not exist. So I don't want to go all 'Broken!' and 'IMBA!!#!', but as far as I remmber from the early days of 'steppes of war' Zerg doesn't do that great in those scenrios. But that was a LONG time ago, and even thou HotS didn't change zergs early game we do have very diffrent queens and unit and building timings are diffrent now.
I'm actually for it, I just hope they throw a balance test version before they put it into the pool so we can fool around with it and see if it's actually still broken to have such close spawns. This is the one place I would add a new kind of destructiable terrain ( the bridge itself ) allowing one player to actually destory the bridge in mid-game.
I agree here with this attitude. It's a new map style altogether different from anything we have seen for a long time. Things like 4 gate and bunkers have been nerfed since we had a map with such a small distance and it could cause some really interesting games.
It's a shame I know that most people will veto it after about 2 games :/
On April 26 2013 23:06 uLysSeS1 wrote: what.... klontas and zerus both have a back entrance to the natural? two maps that are straight up horrible in PvZ due to one stupid design choice? WHY?
Ohana had rocks. Metropolis had rocks. Akilon Wastes currently has rocks. There isn't a problem with them as long as you remain aware of them...
The rocks are kind of in an awkward place compared to where the Protoss Wallin would be. Not really the case with those other maps. As a zerg I noticed it immediately, and ideas started coming on how I could possibly exploit that. Currently my theorycrafting involves swarmhosts and nydus worms.
On April 26 2013 23:06 uLysSeS1 wrote: what.... klontas and zerus both have a back entrance to the natural? two maps that are straight up horrible in PvZ due to one stupid design choice? WHY?
Ohana had rocks. Metropolis had rocks. Akilon Wastes currently has rocks. There isn't a problem with them as long as you remain aware of them...
The rocks are kind of in an awkward place compared to where the Protoss Wallin would be. Not really the case with those other maps. As a zerg I noticed it immediately, and ideas started coming on how I could possibly exploit that. Currently my theorycrafting involves swarmhosts and nydus worms.
You can't exploit it unless the Protoss screws up. It takes a single Pylon to cover the rocks, and once you see them taking damage you do something about it...
Probably, I certainly don't see stuff like roaches doing a damn thing. This is not like blistering sands with the backdoor in the main.
The only decent map here is Reclamation and that is made borderline retarded by having high yield minerals.
Why do they even bother with this shit when there is an army of nerds willing to make maps for contests?
Also why is everyone voting up the Derelicte map? That is probably the most boring circle syndrome map I've seen in a while. Guess people vote based on aesthetics. At least its better than Newkirk
On April 26 2013 23:45 Kowai01 wrote: I dont like (2)Klontas Mire TE. It encourages Cheese to much and its very broken with the current STate of medivac drops since the distance is so close would much rather have all Tourny maps rather than random maps made by blizzard.
we need very diffent maps, that why i like this map. In WoL we only played pretty similar maps, for this reason we saw too many same games.
My three vetoed maps all got removed? check New maps look decent? check If they turn out to be bad, I have plenty of vetoes to rid myself of them? check
Awesome I never liked the look of Daybreak, and while it is the best map we had to date, I've grown soooooooo tired of seeing/playing it. I'm so happy that it'll be gone soon.
I'm kind of sad that Blizzard didn't incorporate any KESPA or GSL maps this time. I mean why even bother making maps when you have two very competent organizations that are doing it for you?
In the future you start to run into problems where ladder maps completely diverge from GSL and KESPA maps, making ladder not a good tool for practicing for professionals. Then you have other tournaments that rely solely on ladder maps for an entire year which sucks as a viewer. Or perhaps now that WCS has been incorporated into major tournaments Blizzard will start to force Blizzard maps as the standard?
Also as a filthy casual I am kind of bummed out that I can't play on the same maps that I see Jangbi, Fantasy, or Flash play. Sure I could make a custom game, but let's be honest no one is playing those and last time I wanted to play Arkanoid I waited 20 minutes to no avail.
I'm kind of sad that Blizzard didn't incorporate any KESPA or GSL maps this time. I mean why even bother making maps when you have two very competent organizations that are doing it for you?
You mean maps like bel'shir vestage whirlwind and planet s?
Hard to believe that tournaments actually said okay to these maps. Chances are blizzard went up to all of them (mostly kespa since they make weird maps), and asked "Apart from the initial concept design, what minor changes would you make? Should those rocks stay or go?" and then went from there. Something is extremely fishy about these tournaments agreeing to Klontas Mire TE all of a sudden when, in the first place, they're afraid to use community maps that have been in production for months.
I’ve been messing about a bit on Derelict Watcher custom and this map just seems totally crazy. Seemingly one of the easiest maps out there to hold 4-5 bases with absolutely HUUUUGE open areas for battles. Obviously playing against an AI doesn’t give you a clear idea on how things will turn out but I’m excited for this map to go live.
I'm really excited to play the new maps and that Daybreak finally got removed. I don't think I'll veto any of the maps to start, although Mire will definitely require a new strategy/build orders.
Is it me or can you forge fast expand in PvZ on the map zerus prime at your third base location? Ramp looks same size as Whirlwind map for example and that means you get 3 very easy bases as protoss vs zerg, might even metagame where zerg goes to 4 bases right after pool instead of 3 if Protoss can wall off normally on third base.
I'll have to check monday since i'm a weekend away, or maybe someone can start up the map and try it out for me?
On April 27 2013 04:42 TechSc2 wrote: Is it me or can you forge fast expand in PvZ on the map zerus prime at your third base location? Ramp looks same size as Whirlwind map for example and that means you get 3 very easy bases as protoss vs zerg, might even metagame where zerg goes to 4 bases right after pool instead of 3 if Protoss can wall off normally on third base.
I'll have to check monday since i'm a weekend away, or maybe someone can start up the map and try it out for me?
Can someone explain why everyone is so hard on Klontus Mire? It doesn't look like a GREAT map to me, but it tries some interesting things at least. It does seem to be a little hard to take bases, but I doubt that is the only reason people don't like it.
As for the other too, Derelict Watcher seems to be a bit too open. As a zerg player, it looks like I have a huge window of opprotunity to catch some ground-based deathball in the surround of my dreams.
Zerus Prime seems like a pretty run of the mill late game split map type map, in the tradition of Shakuras.
I get the idea of why people would rather see GSL or Kespa maps, but when you look at the actual maps that proleague and wcs korea are using, what maps exactly would really fit in on the ladder? Most of the proleague exclusive maps are pretty protoss favored, and the GSL maps might be a little better, but is anyone really clamouring for Atlas or Red City?
On April 27 2013 04:42 TechSc2 wrote: Is it me or can you forge fast expand in PvZ on the map zerus prime at your third base location? Ramp looks same size as Whirlwind map for example and that means you get 3 very easy bases as protoss vs zerg, might even metagame where zerg goes to 4 bases right after pool instead of 3 if Protoss can wall off normally on third base.
I'll have to check monday since i'm a weekend away, or maybe someone can start up the map and try it out for me?
Hilariously enough, it's actually probably easier to try to FFE at the 4th (triple expand eco cheese anyone?) - looks like you could probably wall it with about 4 buildings.
Zerus Prime is one of the worst maps I've ever seen. To fight left-right, there's this stupid narrow land bridge basically, and you practically have 4 in-house bases- 3 if they're horizontal to you I guess. What a disgusting map.
I think Zerus Prime is better than korahal city though. At least the tile set is different. Coming from WC III I love the new maps in the pool. But I wouldn't mind seeing old maps like cloud kingdom for example getting rotated back in or other GSL maps would be cool too. I actually would love to see if they would let the community vote for at least one map to be in the pool, that would be pretty awesome. I think they did it once where you got to vote on a map to be out of the pool and a map to replace it.
On April 26 2013 10:15 Glurkenspurk wrote: Blizzard is really good at making either incredibly boring maps, or incredibly shit maps. It's honestly kind of impressive that they've gone this long without ever making a good map.
Antiga Shipyard? Metalopolis? Shakuras Plateau? Xel'Naga Caverns? Entombed Valley?
Sure, most of those would be considered poor now, but for their time in the meta game they were good, balanced, and saw a lot of tournament use.
On April 26 2013 17:24 Tobblish wrote: Zerus Prime TE Very easy to take bases, create split map with such a narrow middle. Didn't Blizzard learn from Newkirk?
Shakuras - 6 bases per side (and two middle bases) Newkirk - 7 bases per side Daybreak - 6 bases per side Metropolis - 5 bases per side, 2 middle bases (and island bases, which rarely came into play) Zerus Prime - 9 bases per side.
I wonder if having more bases in a split map situation will make them play out more interestingly.
We will be seeing a lot of Raven/Battlecruiser and Templar/Tempest on this map
I spent a few hours testing PvT on Klontas Mire. A probe gets into the terran base before they rally out the scv to build a depot. Even if they know it is coming, they can barely start a bunker in time for your zealot + probe to attack after a 9 pylon 9 gate. They can get a bunker up, but they will lose several scvs doing so and neither of us was able to win as terran when going for a bunker.
They can wall the top of the ramp and float the cc out to the natural, but protoss can cancel the 3rd zealot and go for 2 gate stalker production to kill any buildings left at the top of the ramp before shooting down at them.
The terran can wall the natural choke with a depot and 2 raxes and float to their 3rd. But the protoss can deny the gas at the 3rd with a cannon from the high ground and hit their wall with a second cannon while using a 3rd cannon at home to defend.
I really think the rush distance on this map is too small. The probe just gets there too fast.
derelict watcher and zerus prime = hardcore protoss maps? derelict watcher: put army between ramps of nat and third and your fine except vs drops zerus prime: easy 4th
Derelict Watcher - You can take your fourth+ base only towards your enemy. Very small main and very close third. P>T>Z, I think
Klontas Mire - Strange Design. Reminds me of a mixture of Scrap-Station and Steppes of War. Since the distance from your base to your enemies base is so much longer compared to drop distance, I can't see Protoss doing any significant damage before getting wiped out by Mass drop. T>P>Z
Zerus Prime - So big. But only one little chocke in the middle. Looks like a bigger version of Newkirk. Easy third and fourth (I assume the best fourth are the 9 and 3 o'clock bases) with 9 bases for each player + Split-map-gameplay. I think I gonna leave asap whenever I have to play TvT or ZvP on this map because I can play five other ladder games in the same time. I also think it favors Terran for the same reason the second map does. But not that hard though, most of the games will come down to late game imbalances: T≥P≥Z
these map changes take us two steps forward (removing newkirk, korhal), but probably even more steps back. i don't think any of these maps can come close to replacing daybreak (as stale as it is) and i'm not convinced they're better than newk/kor. hopefully i don't have to unveto star station.
tournaments don't have any idea what constitutes a good map, but they have a very good idea of which casters and players pull the most stream viewers. embarrassing to read. tl mapmaking contest is a great idea however. it is the right way for blizzard to go about producing good maps. involve our awesome community and provide incentive for initiatives like ESV and TPW.
On April 26 2013 10:15 Glurkenspurk wrote: Blizzard is really good at making either incredibly boring maps, or incredibly shit maps. It's honestly kind of impressive that they've gone this long without ever making a good map.
Antiga Shipyard? Metalopolis? Shakuras Plateau? Xel'Naga Caverns? Entombed Valley?
Sure, most of those would be considered poor now, but for their time in the meta game they were good, balanced, and saw a lot of tournament use.
we've had this discussion many times before. tournament use does not always equal 'good map'. why gsl runs an [almost] entirely exclusive map pool devoid of blizzard maps.
which is why its also hilarious blizzard talks about 'tournament edition' on their maps, LOL
On April 26 2013 10:15 Glurkenspurk wrote: Blizzard is really good at making either incredibly boring maps, or incredibly shit maps. It's honestly kind of impressive that they've gone this long without ever making a good map.
Antiga Shipyard? Metalopolis? Shakuras Plateau? Xel'Naga Caverns? Entombed Valley?
Sure, most of those would be considered poor now, but for their time in the meta game they were good, balanced, and saw a lot of tournament use.
we've had this discussion many times before. tournament use does not always equal 'good map'. why gsl runs an [almost] entirely exclusive map pool devoid of blizzard maps.
which is why its also hilarious blizzard talks about 'tournament edition' on their maps, LOL
You think maybe the are called TE because Blizzard plans to use them in a really big tournament they now own? :/
Sorry guys, those maps just look really boring to me. I'd take almost any community map over these. Making maps is just not Blizzards' forte, and it has to be said.
I hate how the new maps have such easy thirds, and zerus has an easy 4th too with tons of choke points. Not sure how protoss is ever going to lose there.
On April 28 2013 00:45 []Phase[] wrote: Sorry guys, those maps just look really boring to me. I'd take almost any community map over these. Making maps is just not Blizzards' forte, and it has to be said.
I'm finding it very hard to think of a community map that's as interesting and aesthetically pleasing as the star station style map. It looks, to me in all honestly that it was co-developed with Kespa.
On April 26 2013 10:15 Glurkenspurk wrote: Blizzard is really good at making either incredibly boring maps, or incredibly shit maps. It's honestly kind of impressive that they've gone this long without ever making a good map.
Antiga Shipyard? Metalopolis? Shakuras Plateau? Xel'Naga Caverns? Entombed Valley?
Sure, most of those would be considered poor now, but for their time in the meta game they were good, balanced, and saw a lot of tournament use.
we've had this discussion many times before. tournament use does not always equal 'good map'. why gsl runs an [almost] entirely exclusive map pool devoid of blizzard maps.
Pretty sure GSL has used at least 2 blizzard maps every season, and others like CK and Ohana which were first introduced on ladder.
On April 28 2013 01:39 aksfjh wrote: I'm not sure even half the people claiming these are "boring" maps even know what makes a map boring...
I know right? Boring maps are Cloud Kingdom/Daybreak style. I'll take imba as fuck maps any day of the year over those
How were Cloud Kingdom and Daybreak boring? We have had endless epic games on these maps. An example of a boring map is Metropolis or Newkirk. Anyway map that rewards turtling basically.
Daybreak is pretty much the "turtle" map. It's really not hard to get a third and as soon as you get the middle it stalemates.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
It plays pretty well despite breaking about all the map making rules it could with it's simple layout. TBH maps are at a weird spot in hots right now, and I'm starting to think we need to take a step back and let go of some of the WoL mentalities. Map balance is more different in HotS than we expected I think.
Star Station is 15-11 PvT on TLPD despite huge air space for drops and a massively open third.
We had all these rules in place for Protoss to be able to expand but now... The maps that are bending those rules are the ones which are P favored.
Then again, TDA with rocks at the third favored Z towards the end of it's life so maybe we didn't know what we were talking about then, either.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
That's cause all the 4p maps are forced cross in tournaments. (I do see players double scout on whirlwind.)
You're right about the openness of course, but you could claim that about any level of openness. What level of openness is the right one... We don't know that yet, apparently. Being this open should be bad for P but the winrates say otherwise.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
Nobody double scouts as as said, no maps require you to. In BW people used to double scout all the time. Open thirds are equal for all sides as all races can abuse it. Protoss has recall now to kill a third and get out. Terran mech has the ability to harass open bases more easily and bio has the mobility to go snipe bases. Zerg excell in large areas too.
Then again, TDA with rocks at the third favored Z towards the end of it's life so maybe we didn't know what we were talking about then, either.
You mean without rocks don't you ?
No. The months before the rocks were removed, it was Z favored ZvP.
I had many a discussion about this. Zerg players did not like it because they had to use a different build due to the rocks, but it was always zerg favoured. The fact that you could not use blink to reduce the distance from main to 3rd made it muta heaven. In the early game protoss has to send the early second scout and could not safely nexus first even if they scouted the right direction due to the long travel time, which made up for zerg not being able to take the quick third.
On the other hand, in the case of Planet S I know jack all. As a protoss player I cannot fathom how protoss is doing so well on the map. There are things in both matchups that should just cause protoss to lose, but they dont.
On April 29 2013 06:08 Gfire wrote: That's cause all the 4p maps are forced cross in tournaments.
I was talking about ladder, but no, some 4p maps have all spawns enabled in tournaments (e. g. Whirlwind) or "no horizontal spawns" (e. g. Star Station in GSL; in ATC I think it's cross only).
(I do see players double scout on whirlwind.)
True, I forgot Protoss can do this in PvZ, but in other match-ups I never saw that.
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
That's cause all the 4p maps are forced cross in tournaments. (I do see players double scout on whirlwind.)
You're right about the openness of course, but you could claim that about any level of openness. What level of openness is the right one... We don't know that yet, apparently. Being this open should be bad for P but the winrates say otherwise.
Then again, TDA with rocks at the third favored Z towards the end of it's life so maybe we didn't know what we were talking about then, either.
You mean without rocks don't you ?
No. The months before the rocks were removed, it was Z favored ZvP.
I had many a discussion about this. Zerg players did not like it because they had to use a different build due to the rocks, but it was always zerg favoured. The fact that you could not use blink to reduce the distance from main to 3rd made it muta heaven. In the early game protoss has to send the early second scout and could not safely nexus first even if they scouted the right direction due to the long travel time, which made up for zerg not being able to take the quick third.
On the other hand, in the case of Planet S I know jack all. As a protoss player I cannot fathom how protoss is doing so well on the map. There are things in both matchups that should just cause protoss to lose, but they dont.
The only viable option for Zerg on TD with rocks was an all in and 2 base Muta and both are countered by opening stargate.
Why were they the only options? What was so wrong with a basic pool > hatch > gas going up to 5 queens while you have have 6 lings slowly kill the rocks? You get a weaker economy but faster tech and creep and could still take your third before the protoss took theirs.
Also, stargate did not counter muta at the time. This was before they even added the phoenix range tech, let alone the hots phoenix range buff. Blink into 3 base storm was the counter to muta play, which was very hard to do on TDA.
This is from the time of the queen range patch to the time (ish) the rocks were removed.
On April 29 2013 06:01 TheDwf wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:53 Qikz wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:21 TheDwf wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:08 Shiori wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:07 MidnightZL wrote:
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
That's cause all the 4p maps are forced cross in tournaments. (I do see players double scout on whirlwind.)
You're right about the openness of course, but you could claim that about any level of openness. What level of openness is the right one... We don't know that yet, apparently. Being this open should be bad for P but the winrates say otherwise.
zvt was 52% favoring terran (not bad) with a record of 64-57 zvp was 51.2% favoring zerg zvp (again not bad) with a record of 44 - 42
We're talking about totally different periods of time here. What you have is all-time in Korea only. I don't think it was even played much in Korea during the time period that I was talking about. It was close to balanced for some time, but as the patches came out and meta evolved, it became Zerg favored by the time the rocks were removed.
On April 29 2013 09:00 hzflank wrote: Also, stargate did not counter muta at the time. This was before they even added the phoenix range tech, let alone the hots phoenix range buff. Blink into 3 base storm was the counter to muta play, which was very hard to do on TDA.
This is from the time of the queen range patch to the time (ish) the rocks were removed.
On April 29 2013 06:01 TheDwf wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:53 Qikz wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:21 TheDwf wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:08 Shiori wrote:
On April 29 2013 04:07 MidnightZL wrote:
On April 28 2013 03:02 washikie wrote: Why did they not remove star station?
Maybe because ppl like it and it's a great map?
What exactly is great about it?
Scouting lottery on ladder, close spawns and a three screens wide concave at the third—what's not to love in there?
There's nothing wrong with having to double scout. Close spawns are not that much of an issue anymore and on that map especially close spawns make little difference due to the relatively long rush distance. The only thing I'll give you is a big concave at the third, but with decent positioning it shouldn't be an issue and it favours both sides as both have relatively vunerable thirds.
No one double scouts at high level, and open thirds are not equal for both sides because not all races/compositions have equal opportunities to exploit them.
That's cause all the 4p maps are forced cross in tournaments. (I do see players double scout on whirlwind.)
You're right about the openness of course, but you could claim that about any level of openness. What level of openness is the right one... We don't know that yet, apparently. Being this open should be bad for P but the winrates say otherwise.
zvt was 52% favoring terran (not bad) with a record of 64-57 zvp was 51.2% favoring zerg zvp (again not bad) with a record of 44 - 42
We're talking about totally different periods of time here. What you have is all-time in Korea only. I don't think it was even played much in Korea during the time period that I was talking about. It was close to balanced for some time, but as the patches came out and meta evolved, it became Zerg favored by the time the rocks were removed.
On April 29 2013 09:00 hzflank wrote: Also, stargate did not counter muta at the time. This was before they even added the phoenix range tech, let alone the hots phoenix range buff. Blink into 3 base storm was the counter to muta play, which was very hard to do on TDA.
Phoenix range was in by that time.
still, no one went phoenix to counter muta at the time. the accepted counter to muta was 3 base storm.
On April 29 2013 09:55 Shebuha wrote: Blizzard is getting much better at making maps, but like 90% of the 4p maps they make or add to the ladder should just be cross only.......
Imagine the horizontal doom drops /siege tanks from horizontal spawn 4ths to 4ths... -_-
Derelict Watcher and Reclamation look alright, the rest look AWFUL lol Can't believe they're taking out Daybreak to make room for those, even if it's an ancient map T-T
Then again, TDA with rocks at the third favored Z towards the end of it's life so maybe we didn't know what we were talking about then, either.
You mean without rocks don't you ?
No. The months before the rocks were removed, it was Z favored ZvP.
I had many a discussion about this. Zerg players did not like it because they had to use a different build due to the rocks, but it was always zerg favoured. The fact that you could not use blink to reduce the distance from main to 3rd made it muta heaven. In the early game protoss has to send the early second scout and could not safely nexus first even if they scouted the right direction due to the long travel time, which made up for zerg not being able to take the quick third.
On the other hand, in the case of Planet S I know jack all. As a protoss player I cannot fathom how protoss is doing so well on the map. There are things in both matchups that should just cause protoss to lose, but they dont.
Did you ever play against the CombatEx Z build where all you do is build static defense expand to every base on the map and split your workers and tech between them all the while massing mutas and waiting for him to attmept a base trade? That was always so much fun to do.
What would be so hard about putting Bifrost on ladder? That's by far the best unique map anyone has made. To this day, the best origional map those idiots have come up was Entombed Valley... yeah.
I've played Derelict Watcher TE and god is it open. Map has nothing in the middle except for a few LOS blockers. It's probably one of the most open map that ever made it's way on the ladder.
Derelict Watcher is such a ridiculous map for terran lol. Spawns are so close that protoss 2 base is so easy and so wide that zergs can attack from any angle. Having a high ground 3rd doesn't do anything for terran since you can just ignore it and go straight for the natural.
Klontas on the other hand seems to be very hard for zerg.
so just 1 season into hots where blizzard wanted to adapt mappools of pro tournaments they decide to add 3 random blizzard maps instead of the plethora of new map in gsl and proleague
Klontas Mire TE, this is going to be an interesting map for however long it's around. Had a guy who moved his entire production and expansion to the bottom of the map and waited until I hit what thought was his main to attack mine. Granted I should have realized the second I saw he never expanded as I moved my army to get back home but well, lesson learned.
But I wonder if this will be a common tactic people will use due to that lil bridge connecting the areas.
Idk why people downvote the one interesting map in the current pool. Every other map with the exception of Belshir and maybe Neo Planet S are almost the same.
Does anyone actually try to play a standard game on Klontas Mire? I'm considering keeping the map in the rotation so I have an excuse to cheese once in a while.
On May 04 2013 14:18 FCReverie wrote: Idk why people downvote the one interesting map in the current pool. Every other map with the exception of Belshir and maybe Neo Planet S are almost the same.
Exactly my feeling. But everytime a map is not standard everyone hates on it since for their default strat they need to take an x-th expansion easily while it should be hard for the opponent to take their y-th expansion, so in the end all maps are very similar to meet those requirements.
Personally for most maps the only relevant differences for me are how large of an area I can use with reapers and where the mineral line is for drops.
There's nothing wrong with the Mire map. If anything, it gives you a reason to not use the same strategies over and over no matter what the map. It's fun to be able to play a map instead of just a race. I have yet to win on it, but I'm still trying!
For example,because of the new reaper, Thorzain's old TvT mass marine build no longer works except on Whirlwind. It's nice to be able to do a different build on Whirlwind than on other maps.
On May 06 2013 05:18 Zygno wrote: I really like "Zerus Prime", especially TvZ is fun on it! Would love to see it in some tournaments, it has a lot of potential imo.
Also this map is the best in terms of aesthetic and design. Lava, jungles, simple terrain, good lighting, nice unpassable zones (jungles and lava or both)
Klontas Mire is my new favorite map. I just LOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE the design of it and how my games have played out so far. Anyone else having really good experiences with this map?
So after playing the new maps for a bit, I think I'm gonna have Klontas Mire TE be the one I don't veto. This leaves my veto choices being: Derelict Watcher TE, Zerus Prime TE, and Star Station.
The terrain layout of Derelict Watcher felt incredibly off to me and Zerus... well, I'm not sure how anyone could enjoy playing on that map, but then again people played on maps like Condemned Ridge. o.o Klontas, while a bit weird, at least flowed well IMO and offers some decent opportunities for things like mech, as some people have noted in this thread.
After a week with the new maps - I can't hold it in me. I JUST HAVE TO VOMIT. Terrible maps. I thought Star Station was bad... but this. Oh god.... From the 3 maps - everyone of them is horrible. They removed Daybreak to add new way worse maps? Good job there, I guess. Never expected less from Blizzard. AT LEAST THEY HAVE MANY ROCKS,AMIRITE?
Personally I prefer maps that are simple yet fairly balanced.
Maps like klontas or zerus are more complex than say a star station or day break, but as a result people can abuse the terrain to make blink and reaper all-ins way more effective than they should reasonably be. Also maps should not be overly complex and overwhelming - even as a Master's player I am slightly overwhelmed with say a zerus where there are 18 bases it's impossible to keep tabs on what my opponent is doing....I cannot imagine somebody newer to the game enjoying it very much. There is middle ground, but maps can be too big imo....maps like Day Break or Neo planet is constant action which I enjoy and it is possible to constantly scout what your opponent is taking base wise and is much more back and forth rather than take 4 easy bases and then do battle.
I didn't veto any of the new maps, but I am not exactly thrilled with them.
Star station and Neo planet S are my favorite of the current pool.
On May 06 2013 06:00 grumpyone wrote: After just losing to 2rax proxy reaper on Klontas Mire (as Zerg), I'm just going to say that that map is really good for reapers...
I'd say that Star Station is still the best reaper map though. Close spawns on that map the normal reaper sometimes gets there just as the pool finishes.
On May 07 2013 05:02 Jalued wrote: Does anyone know how to prevent the toss placing proxy pylons on Klontis mire? They can put them behind the rocks (south of the natural) and there is nothing that terran can do about it until warpgate appears...
This map pool is shite...
Can your break down the rocks ahead of time vs a 2 base all in? vs a 1 base all in you should already know it's coming and be prepared because he wont have expanded.
Really not liking this new map pool. Klontas Mire is actually okay but the rest are not fun at all. Zerus is really boring and turtly and Derelict Watcher is way too open, making the popular upgraded ling style even stronger. I kinda wish they didn't remove Newkirk now. I would way rather have that than either of these new maps.
On May 07 2013 05:13 Jalued wrote: You can prepare for it but because of the position of the natural you can only hold on 1 base. I'm sure there are ways to get around it but the entire situation is tiresome and I don't have the patience to play on such a stupid map
Yeah it's a shame terran buildings can't fly away if they are in a bad spot vs a 1 base all in :/ Even if you can't hold the base you can float it out, save the scvs and when they go to expo push back out.
Gosh these new maps are so bad. It really annoys the shit out of me how Blizzard is making it look like they are trying to make tournament level maps now but what they are actually doing is making the same shitty maps as before. Maybe it's going to be even worse because they will force WCS organizers to use those maps in their tournament. Why are we still not having a solid system of implementing community made maps in the ladder pool?
So I have decided that zerus and the green one are two of the worst maps I have played on since blizzard added like 4 of their shitty maps (including a really terrible 4 player fire map) way way back in 2011. Now all I have to choose is whether I veto star station or the new map with the same tileset, which has the worst designed map center I have seen in a long time. Oh well I guess I'll have to start practicing 2 base allins again for star station, because the 3 other ones are so fucking bad I'll never ever want to play on them again.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/6DYG7A0CO09B1366930140207.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6qLKOFy.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aKjtacD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NVmtyLX.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fshrIfe.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Bisf52a.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/L5xwVHI.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ahdPU3X.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/x3FswXm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MgxHdVp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BZICJyU.jpg)
Or maybe now it's Akilon? 
The others look interesting though.
though the days of one base b-busting in Korhal City are now gone 
