|
On October 07 2014 21:18 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2014 19:14 Meavis wrote:On October 07 2014 19:03 Big J wrote:On October 07 2014 18:22 Meavis wrote:On October 07 2014 17:51 SatedSC2 wrote:On October 07 2014 16:53 Meavis wrote:
pretty funny how this map is getting praised as if it has any less problems than the others, here begins the reaper/blink madness. Yet despite the problems, it's still better than all of the current map-pool (except Overgrowth) as a HotS map  Of course that's not hard, given that Overgrowth is the only current map that isn't complete and utter trash. wouldn't expect any different from you seeing as how protoss favored cloud kingdom is. cloud kingdom is worse than any map in the current pool, even deadwing. Nimbus. For CK; if they remove the one or other set of rocks it might already be quite better, now that we do not need overpowered sentry builds anymore. oh come on, you are not seriously considering nimbus to be worse than CK? all nimbus has is the inbase nat being somewhat exposed to drops, where cloud kingdom has huge blink/reaper surface area on the main, lot's of problematic chokes making normal engagements almost impossible. non-cross on Nimbus is massively imbalanced. (In general I'm not a fan of rotational "symmetry" on 4p, because at that point we could as well just make assymetric maps to begin with, but that just as a sidenote) The map is extremely turtly, near impossible to attack a 3rd base for Zerg. Meanwhile it is also incredibly hard to take a 4th base for Zerg. On top of that you put the extreme vulnerability of the natural to drops. And that's 59% TvZ which is balanced compared to the 34% winrate for Protoss against Terran there. Meanwhile all you say about CK is basically theorycraft about its HotS gameplay, while we know the map was extremely stable in WoL.
Let's be fair, you are both theory crafting. :p
Not saying that makes either of you wrong, but it's not much point in throwing that kind of accusations around, is there?
|
the thing is it's not extremely hard to tell a high blink/reaper surface area to the main is going to give problems, which is something unique to HotS, and therefor throwing in that it was stable in WoL irrelevant.
|
On October 07 2014 21:23 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2014 21:18 Big J wrote:On October 07 2014 19:14 Meavis wrote:On October 07 2014 19:03 Big J wrote:On October 07 2014 18:22 Meavis wrote:On October 07 2014 17:51 SatedSC2 wrote:On October 07 2014 16:53 Meavis wrote:
pretty funny how this map is getting praised as if it has any less problems than the others, here begins the reaper/blink madness. Yet despite the problems, it's still better than all of the current map-pool (except Overgrowth) as a HotS map Of course that's not hard, given that Overgrowth is the only current map that isn't complete and utter trash. wouldn't expect any different from you seeing as how protoss favored cloud kingdom is. cloud kingdom is worse than any map in the current pool, even deadwing. Nimbus. For CK; if they remove the one or other set of rocks it might already be quite better, now that we do not need overpowered sentry builds anymore. oh come on, you are not seriously considering nimbus to be worse than CK? all nimbus has is the inbase nat being somewhat exposed to drops, where cloud kingdom has huge blink/reaper surface area on the main, lot's of problematic chokes making normal engagements almost impossible. non-cross on Nimbus is massively imbalanced. (In general I'm not a fan of rotational "symmetry" on 4p, because at that point we could as well just make assymetric maps to begin with, but that just as a sidenote) The map is extremely turtly, near impossible to attack a 3rd base for Zerg. Meanwhile it is also incredibly hard to take a 4th base for Zerg. On top of that you put the extreme vulnerability of the natural to drops. And that's 59% TvZ which is balanced compared to the 34% winrate for Protoss against Terran there. Meanwhile all you say about CK is basically theorycraft about its HotS gameplay, while we know the map was extremely stable in WoL. Let's be fair, you are both theory crafting. :p Not saying that makes either of you wrong, but it's not much point in throwing that kind of accusations around, is there?
Wait, I'm basing my argument of actual gameplay in the last months. That's not theorycrafting.
For CK there is no actual gameplay, so it is theorycrafting.
|
On October 07 2014 21:28 Meavis wrote:
the thing is it's not extremely hard to tell a high blink/reaper surface area to the main is going to give problems, which is something unique to HotS, and therefor throwing in that it was stable in WoL irrelevant.
yeah, but there have been quite some balance changes since the days of blink. And since it works out on KSS and Catallena, I don't see how blink would necessarily break CK.
Strong build? Sure.
Too strong for my liking? Sure!
Strong enough that it turns out imbalanced? Not so sure.
|
the strength of blink builds is is instantly swapping between pressuring the main and natural, you can't quite do this on sejong and catallena, on cloud kingdom is takes much longer for units to walk from one place to another where as blink can just teleport around, it really depends on how much stalkers have to walk around outside of blinking.
on top of that both sejong and catallena have far less surface area, and the map plays out much more like how blink would play out on maps such as heavy rain and yeonsu.
"quite some balance changes" is just a minor vision reduction on the MScore and a cost change on time warp.
|
On October 07 2014 21:46 Meavis wrote:
the strength of blink builds is is instantly swapping between pressuring the main and natural, you can't quite do this on sejong and catallena, on cloud kingdom is takes much longer for units to walk from one place to another where as blink can just teleport around, it really depends on how much stalkers have to walk around outside of blinking.
on top of that both sejong and catallena have far less surface area, and the map plays out much more like how blink would play out on maps such as heavy rain and yeonsu.
"quite some balance changes" is just a minor vision reduction on the MScore and a cost change on time warp.
On top of that we had quite a large buff to widow mines which does incredibly strengthen 1-1-1 openings which require a Protoss to have detection. In The_Dwf's article he specifically adressed that WM nerf was quite a factor in the occurence of blink builds, due to no early thread when going without detection for Protoss. The current widow mine is two times as strong against stalkers and as good as it ever was in terms of harassment.
yeah, and how broken was blink on Heavy Rain and Yeonsu really?
Terrans eventually adapted to it and blink builds were kind of a 50/50 build in terms of winrate. Similar to two rax or Sentry/Immortal against Zerg. Do I like those builds? Nope. But it's something you have to deal with for as long as blizzard doesn't fix the units/builds that actually cause these "imbalances".
|
DO NOT TALK about Heavy Rain AGAIN ! NEVER !
|
Metalopolis is the second confirmed map.
|
Oh fuck yes. I mean, it's not Steppes of War but it's getting closer
|
Lorning
Belgica34432 Posts
|
|
|
OMG i fucking hate that map.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On October 09 2014 03:08 Lorning wrote:
Perfect
…said the protoss cheeser ^^
|
Uhm...
How was the ladder version of Metalopolis?
Have they ever disabled close positions on ladder, or was it only adjusted for the tournaments?
... because with close positions the map just sucked REALLY hard.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On October 09 2014 03:18 Swisslink wrote:
Uhm...
How was the ladder version of Metalopolis?
Have they ever disabled close positions on ladder, or was it only adjusted for the tournaments?
... because with close positions the map just sucked REALLY hard.
I'm pretty sure they disabled close positions.
|
On October 09 2014 03:18 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2014 03:18 Swisslink wrote:
Uhm...
How was the ladder version of Metalopolis?
Have they ever disabled close positions on ladder, or was it only adjusted for the tournaments?
... because with close positions the map just sucked REALLY hard. I'm pretty sure they disabled close positions.
Yup, close was turned off. Didn't it even go only cross in the end or am I rembering it wrong?
|
On October 09 2014 03:20 Zzzapper wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2014 03:18 The_Templar wrote:On October 09 2014 03:18 Swisslink wrote:
Uhm...
How was the ladder version of Metalopolis?
Have they ever disabled close positions on ladder, or was it only adjusted for the tournaments?
... because with close positions the map just sucked REALLY hard. I'm pretty sure they disabled close positions. Yup, close was turned off. Didn't it even go only cross in the end or am I rembering it wrong?
Oh... there's a history on Liquipedia :-P
MLG Metalopolis
- No close spawn positions
- Neutral supply depot at ramp
NASL
- Cross position enforced
- Rocks at gold base
Ladder Season 4
- No close spawn positions
Still wondering which version they're gonna take. no "neutral supply depot" seems rather odd as well, nowadays.
|
Northern Ireland27462 Posts
Seen some great games, will probably be terrible now but I would be happy to be proven wrong. There pretty much being 2 lanes that traverse the map will make Swarmhost play extremely strong potentially
|
Yes!!
Metalopolis~
Now Antiga Shipyard, and all shall be good.
|
On October 09 2014 03:29 Wombat_NI wrote:
Seen some great games, will probably be terrible now but I would be happy to be proven wrong. There pretty much being 2 lanes that traverse the map will make Swarmhost play extremely strong potentially
but then you got the airspace<3
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
