EPT-People don't cannon that much
-Stopping cannon rushes isn't that hard if you prepare for it
-Like you said in the OP, cannon rusher's are usually weak at their home base.
I do think they could make some more balanced fun maps though.
What the hell is with the 3v3 maps - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
guN-viCe
United States687 Posts
-People don't cannon that much -Stopping cannon rushes isn't that hard if you prepare for it -Like you said in the OP, cannon rusher's are usually weak at their home base. I do think they could make some more balanced fun maps though. | ||
|
Koshi
Belgium38799 Posts
That being said, I played some teamgames in Season 1, and there wasn't that much cannoning going on. I made it to masters in +-25 games in 2v2, 3v3 and only played 20 games or so in 4v4. So I kinda played from gold to low master level. The biggest issue is that the maps are so small, which makes teamgames feel really cheap, even though the games I played were pretty ok. I think they should make the distance between spawns at least 3 times as large, but I guess that would give performance issues to some computers. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On June 26 2013 07:30 JP Dayne wrote: I don't think blizz gives a shit about competitiveness of 3v3 or its maps for that matter. You should stick to having silly harmless fun instead of going competitive, coz neither the units nor the maps are balanced for 2x2, 3x3, 4x4, 2x2x2x2, etc i dont really about competitiveness either. but to maybe just replace the areas in the white circles with a hole, or something only reapers can get through. its a matter of just having a fun experience for players of all skill levels. its a question of how capable do you think players are in bronze-gold to stop cannon rushes? and how they feel about being on the receiving end of one? | ||
|
bduddy
United States1326 Posts
| ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On June 26 2013 07:40 a176 wrote: i dont really about competitiveness either. but to maybe just replace the areas in the white circles with a hole, or something only reapers can get through. its a matter of just having a fun experience for players of all skill levels. its a question of how capable do you think players are in bronze-gold to stop cannon rushes? and how they feel about being on the receiving end of one? agreed. its boring to get cannon rushed where there are so few options to prevent/stop it even if you see it coming. | ||
|
TheFlexN
Israel472 Posts
| ||
|
sage_francis
France1823 Posts
| ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
And since there isn't really competitive 2s/3s/4s, Blizzard seems to give even LESS of a shit about the map pool. Team matches are just there to cheese and get portraits. Taking it seriously will result in massive amounts of depression. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
So I mean, if as Blizzard, you literally don't give a shit about 3v3, why even have it has a playable option? | ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
The maps are not that bad, some of them are kinda shitty but not as bad as you say. I dont see why you just have to play "4 base style" on 3:3 at all when you can 15min no rush on all the other game modes and even 3 of the 3:3 maps. | ||
|
RHGaming
United States83 Posts
| ||
|
Nimix
France1809 Posts
To the guy above, why wouldn't people want longer games? Why are 6/7mn all ins fun? You got no tech, no fun units to play with (unupgraded marines yo, slow banes or slow roaches, gateway units..). So the games are just coinflips with little to no micro, which is not fun for most people I guess... except the try hards who absolutely want to go masters in 4V4 and do sophisticated collective cheeses every game. | ||
|
spalding
95 Posts
| ||
|
crbox
Canada1180 Posts
From what I've played it's only fast timings off one base on most map because the map rarely allows you to expand safely without over committing to early defense. | ||
|
Iksf
United Kingdom444 Posts
| ||
|
RaiZ
2813 Posts
On June 26 2013 06:54 a176 wrote: About queen's nest : The middle 2 watchtowers are virtually useless because they are hidden behind destructible rocks. What's wrong with it ? The faster the side is destroying it, the more advantage he'll get in order to see what's happening on the other side. Sure once only one rock is destroyed the other can get there, but that'd mean he'd have to make a little "detour" in order to get to the xel'naga's towers, which can easily be defended. I don't feel like it's a bad design. Quite the opposite actually. On the other hands about canons rushes, you're pretty much right about everything. | ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
On June 26 2013 07:58 Nimix wrote: Yeah maps kind of ruin the fun of 3's/4s. I like to go play with 2 or 3 friends taht are not especially good at the game (from bronze to gold), but most of the game are just giant cheese fests, and to be honest it's kind of hard to defend and enjoy the games, so you basically have to cheese back and coinflip. It's sad because 3v3 or 4V4 games going longer are often hilarious, while cheeses games are just.. well, like 1V1 cheeses but with 3 guys cheesing you (let's face it, by the time your friends bring their army you're dead on maps with separated bases, which there are a lot). To the guy above, why wouldn't people want longer games? Why are 6/7mn all ins fun? You got no tech, no fun units to play with (unupgraded marines yo, slow banes or slow roaches, gateway units..). So the games are just coinflips with little to no micro, which is not fun for most people I guess... except the try hards who absolutely want to go masters in 4V4 and do sophisticated collective cheeses every game. The intensity and the micro. If you dont agree that there is alot of micro in early game attacks then I dont know what to say. Also in high masters most can defend the early game pushes and you have to tech from there. And if your ally get attacked by all the opponents just let him die slowly while you and the guy that is still alive counters. Thats the brilliant thing with separated bases, you havent lost the game if you get smacked by some early agression. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5219 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On June 26 2013 08:26 RaiZ wrote: What's wrong with it ? The faster the side is destroying it, the more advantage he'll get in order to see what's happening on the other side. Sure once only one rock is destroyed the other can get there, but that'd mean he'd have to make a little "detour" in order to get to the xel'naga's towers, which can easily be defended. I don't feel like it's a bad design. Quite the opposite actually. On the other hands about canons rushes, you're pretty much right about everything. its useless because no one bothers with it, as every game is a rushfest on that map because there are no extra bases to take, and the relatively short rush distance. thats aside from the usual cannon strat of course. | ||
|
hootsushi
Germany3468 Posts
I understand the decision to make maps small in team games because of the lag issue, but it's simply annoying to starve for minerals and don't contribute anything to the game since the maps only guarantee two players a stable mid/late game. It just isn't fun and I'm only playing team games for fun. You have ten minutes to make something happen and then you vanish into insignificance. The only comfort you have is there's another person on the other side, who is fucked just like you. | ||
| ||
