|
On October 10 2014 20:02 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 19:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On October 10 2014 19:55 Wombat_NI wrote:
I don't have a massive issue with their pools other than I would like a much bigger map pool with more vetoes. The current setup is great because you should never play on a vetoed map ; even if you and your opponent vetoed 3 different maps, there will still be 1 map you both didn't veto. If the map pool had for instance 10 maps with 6 vetos, it's quite unlikely you and your opponent will have a "common" map. Even a 8 maps / 4 vetos configuration can be problematic since 8 = 4 + 4. I guess that's the reason why they stick to this 7/3 setup, which is a good thing in my opinion. Wouldn't 9/4, 11/5 or 13/6 have the same effect?
It would... But I must admit I like not to have to play on too many maps, then again I'm the guy who has one macro build per match up and never plays anything else, and I got a feeling not too many people enjoy playing the way I do, so this must be a very personal opinion... I could live with 9/4 (5 different maps to play) but the other configurations would annoy me.
|
On October 10 2014 18:08 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 17:54 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 10 2014 05:55 Big J wrote:On October 10 2014 05:46 Wombat_NI wrote:
I don't know what the fuck they were thinking with the first incarnation of Daedalus lol The ramp was 4-wide instead of 3-wide. That was basically it. They patched it asap, when they saw that it really doesn't work. I don't think blizzard should get so much hate for it, I'd rather have them do those experiements on a regular basis to stretch the game balance. Though, maybe not in WCS but maybe in between seasons. Oh, that's what they are doing right now!  Except instead of bringing in NEW experimental maps, they went on some kind of nostalgic gravedigging spree and brought back Metalopolis from its well deserved eternal rest. Exactly. Just go have a look at some recent, interesting, innovative, new maps published in the custom maps forum (and these are just the ones on the first page). Having them in an offseason/alternative map pool would be exciting.
These aren't really experimental. They often have a new feature, but I can blindly tell you that they all feature:
- air distance is long
- ground walking distance same old, same old
- first 3 bases all blue; no mixed bases
- 3rd base is not too open
- normal mineral/gas setup (8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold)
- at least 5 bases per player (though even that is rare these days; it's usually 6-8)
- if XNWT, they are not looking inside the first 3 bases
- not too chokey at key points (force fields)
- not too open (mapmakers don't like that, though it doesn't break anything)
- multiple paths around the map
- main mineral line out of siege range
- no dropable highgrounds around the map
- tiny choke at the main
- small-mid choke at the natural
- reasonably anti-blink
...
Polar Night, Frost, Yeonsu, Nimbus, King Sejong Station, Habitation Station, Korhal Sky Island, Merry Go Round...
all of them brought something new to the table. All of them didn't really have any big experimental feature (except for the golden 3rd base on Habitation Station). I love those maps, but once in a while I like it when there is something like Alterzim, Daedalus or Waystation being tested. (obviously, Waystation should have gone way earlier. Alterzim was a good experiment and Daedalus was patched quite quickly, so not much of a deal)
You know, something that actually has the chance of introducing a feature of which you couldn't just say "well, of course you can make that work if you just make it so that the opponent still cannot emphasize on it" (e.g. KSS backdoor; e.g. Polar Night backdoor expansion; e.g. Yeonsu having a third option that just turned out better than the one with the exposed mineral line; e.g. MGR's new feature being that it is 3p which is nothing that influences gameplay at all; e.g. Frost's new feature being that it is mirrored 4p which is nothing that influences gameplay at all...)
|
On October 10 2014 20:12 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 18:08 OtherWorld wrote:On October 10 2014 17:54 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 10 2014 05:55 Big J wrote:On October 10 2014 05:46 Wombat_NI wrote:
I don't know what the fuck they were thinking with the first incarnation of Daedalus lol The ramp was 4-wide instead of 3-wide. That was basically it. They patched it asap, when they saw that it really doesn't work. I don't think blizzard should get so much hate for it, I'd rather have them do those experiements on a regular basis to stretch the game balance. Though, maybe not in WCS but maybe in between seasons. Oh, that's what they are doing right now! Except instead of bringing in NEW experimental maps, they went on some kind of nostalgic gravedigging spree and brought back Metalopolis from its well deserved eternal rest. Exactly. Just go have a look at some recent, interesting, innovative, new maps published in the custom maps forum (and these are just the ones on the first page). Having them in an offseason/alternative map pool would be exciting. These aren't really experimental. They often have a new feature, but I can blindly tell you that they all feature: - air distance is long - ground walking distance same old, same old - first 3 bases all blue; no mixed bases - 3rd base is not too open - normal mineral/gas setup (8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold) - at least 5 bases per player (though even that is rare these days; it's usually 6-8) - if XNWT, they are not looking inside the first 3 bases - not too chokey at key points (force fields) - not too open (mapmakers don't like that, though it doesn't break anything) - multiple paths around the map - main mineral line out of siege range - no dropable highgrounds around the map - tiny choke at the main - small-mid choke at the natural - reasonably anti-blink ...
Well, seems like modern maps indeed feature most of the things that make a map solid and playable in HotS. Shocking ? Some of the features you describe could be tampered with but they're mostly things you'll have headaches trying to get around.
|
Experimental/innovative does not mean totally broken. Also they often have only ONE new feature, and that's precisely why they are good ; you can't judge a map with tons of new features because you aren't able to tell apart broken features from good ones
|
yep, everything on that list is there for good reason.
|
On October 10 2014 20:24 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 20:12 Big J wrote:On October 10 2014 18:08 OtherWorld wrote:On October 10 2014 17:54 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 10 2014 05:55 Big J wrote:On October 10 2014 05:46 Wombat_NI wrote:
I don't know what the fuck they were thinking with the first incarnation of Daedalus lol The ramp was 4-wide instead of 3-wide. That was basically it. They patched it asap, when they saw that it really doesn't work. I don't think blizzard should get so much hate for it, I'd rather have them do those experiements on a regular basis to stretch the game balance. Though, maybe not in WCS but maybe in between seasons. Oh, that's what they are doing right now! Except instead of bringing in NEW experimental maps, they went on some kind of nostalgic gravedigging spree and brought back Metalopolis from its well deserved eternal rest. Exactly. Just go have a look at some recent, interesting, innovative, new maps published in the custom maps forum (and these are just the ones on the first page). Having them in an offseason/alternative map pool would be exciting. These aren't really experimental. They often have a new feature, but I can blindly tell you that they all feature: - air distance is long - ground walking distance same old, same old - first 3 bases all blue; no mixed bases - 3rd base is not too open - normal mineral/gas setup (8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold) - at least 5 bases per player (though even that is rare these days; it's usually 6-8) - if XNWT, they are not looking inside the first 3 bases - not too chokey at key points (force fields) - not too open (mapmakers don't like that, though it doesn't break anything) - multiple paths around the map - main mineral line out of siege range - no dropable highgrounds around the map - tiny choke at the main - small-mid choke at the natural - reasonably anti-blink ... Well, seems like modern maps indeed feature most of the things that make a map solid and playable in HotS. Shocking ? Some of the features you describe could be tampered with but they're mostly things you'll have headaches trying to get around.
OK, so what happens when you make a natural a gold base? I don't see how you can predict anything else but "this might not work out", but not any specific problem in any specific matchup. I guess fast expanding is going to be good there, no kidding... How does that break the metagame of fast expanding?
What happens when you make a double wide ramp to the main? Terran opens reaper and is safe against early pools. Protoss walls the natural with a FFE and doesn't care about the main ramp size. Or they just gateway expand, in which case they more often than not don't wall the main either. There is nothing that suggest that you MUST be able to wall or forcefield the main ramp. Sure it's easier to defend if you can, but it is not required.
Main mineral line in siege range. Yeah, unless you put the tank on a cliff, you can probably engage that tank and kill it. If you have ranged units, you can probably just kill the tank from up your ledge.
Multiple paths around the map. Do we need that? Shakuras wasn't really broken because of it. And hell, it played out differently, exactly what a map should do. Play out different from another.
No dropable highgrounds... Yeah, again Shakuras. What's wrong with it if I can drop something in the middle of the map. As long as it is not a retarted early game imbalanced position you either can avoid that position, or deal with it.
8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold for bases. Yeah, well that goes on blizzard. Not sure if they are still against it, but yeah, they used to patch this out of maps like Daybreak. Why? What does it break?
XNWT that don't scout enemy bases? Why? The game allows you to scout anything anyways. In this case you are just forced to hide your stuff better or play straight up.
Short air distance. Just try it for once. We have Nimbus. Yeah, the map is broken, but on that map the air distance also plays out asymetrical and the map has quite some other issues as well. And you know, I still think the map is playable in all matchups.
...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I'd love to see maps based around any of those features. The old maps have none of this tho so if the choice is old outdated standard maps and new standard maps I'll take the new maps.
|
On October 10 2014 18:05 y0su wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 17:28 FFW_Rude wrote:On October 10 2014 11:07 Circumstance wrote:
Everyone's favorite cynic had this to say after his operation today:
What did he said ? I don't have sound at work  (hope he is alright) "Metalopolis? Give me more morphine!"
Man... TB... please be back soon we love you
|
On October 10 2014 20:49 Big J wrote:
OK, so what happens when you make a natural a gold base? I don't see how you can predict anything else but "this might not work out", but not any specific problem in any specific matchup. I guess fast expanding is going to be good there, no kidding... How does that break the metagame of fast expanding?
no good reason to add it
makes 2 base play even more stronger than 1 base play, further killing any early game action which is all ready rare
accelerates any lead, destroying comeback potential
What happens when you make a double wide ramp to the main? Terran opens reaper and is safe against early pools. Protoss walls the natural with a FFE and doesn't care about the main ramp size. Or they just gateway expand, in which case they more often than not don't wall the main either. There is nothing that suggest that you MUST be able to wall or forcefield the main ramp. Sure it's easier to defend if you can, but it is not required.
no good reason to add it
4gate
6pool
ling bane bust
Main mineral line in siege range. Yeah, unless you put the tank on a cliff, you can probably engage that tank and kill it. If you have ranged units, you can probably just kill the tank from up your ledge.
no good reason to add it
either completely broken or useless, there is no mid ground
Multiple paths around the map. Do we need that? Shakuras wasn't really broken because of it. And hell, it played out differently, exactly what a map should do. Play out different from another.
shakuras WAS broken because of it, it's the main reason why shakuras didn't stand the test of time, it was to easy to great wall of PF/spines the middle
No dropable highgrounds... Yeah, again Shakuras. What's wrong with it if I can drop something in the middle of the map. As long as it is not a retarted early game imbalanced position you either can avoid that position, or deal with it.
no good reason to add it, unless you just want to make terran stronger (hello deadwing)
8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold for bases. Yeah, well that goes on blizzard. Not sure if they are still against it, but yeah, they used to patch this out of maps like Daybreak. Why? What does it break?
it breaks the economy mold, bases are taken in odd paces and screw over any balance( remember FRB? yeah...).
not newb friendly.
blizzard is still against it.
XNWT that don't scout enemy bases? Why? The game allows you to scout anything anyways. In this case you are just forced to hide your stuff better or play straight up.
it's about as retarded as having two maphackers play eachother, there's a reason FoW exists.
Short air distance. Just try it for once. We have Nimbus. Yeah, the map is broken, but on that map the air distance also plays out asymetrical and the map has quite some other issues as well. And you know, I still think the map is playable in all matchups.
...
nimbus has a quite defendable natural, and you still have to cross half the map to get in, true close air is nimbus on crack.
|
On October 10 2014 21:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
I'd love to see maps based around any of those features. The old maps have none of this tho so if the choice is old outdated standard maps and new standard maps I'll take the new maps.
Well I'm really looking forward to Cloud Kingdom. I loved that map. And there are quite some others that I would love to play again on the ladder. Like, if I should play standard maps, make it the best we have ever had.
For others like Metalopolis, obviously this sounds like bullshit.
In any case, I believe this is just a part of their LotV promotion strategy. At Blizzcon they will show a trailer for that expansion, people that stopped caring about Starcraft might open up the game or stream. They see an old map that they used to know and might get a little more excited.
|
On October 10 2014 21:09 Meavis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 20:49 Big J wrote:
OK, so what happens when you make a natural a gold base? I don't see how you can predict anything else but "this might not work out", but not any specific problem in any specific matchup. I guess fast expanding is going to be good there, no kidding... How does that break the metagame of fast expanding? no good reason to add it makes 2 base play even more stronger than 1 base play, further killing any early game action which is all ready rare accelerates any lead, destroying comeback potential Show nested quote +
What happens when you make a double wide ramp to the main? Terran opens reaper and is safe against early pools. Protoss walls the natural with a FFE and doesn't care about the main ramp size. Or they just gateway expand, in which case they more often than not don't wall the main either. There is nothing that suggest that you MUST be able to wall or forcefield the main ramp. Sure it's easier to defend if you can, but it is not required.
no good reason to add it 4gate 6pool ling bane bust Show nested quote +
Main mineral line in siege range. Yeah, unless you put the tank on a cliff, you can probably engage that tank and kill it. If you have ranged units, you can probably just kill the tank from up your ledge.
no good reason to add it either completely broken or useless, there is no mid ground Show nested quote +
Multiple paths around the map. Do we need that? Shakuras wasn't really broken because of it. And hell, it played out differently, exactly what a map should do. Play out different from another.
shakuras WAS broken because of it, it's the main reason why shakuras didn't stand the test of time, it was to easy to great wall of PF/spines the middle Show nested quote +
No dropable highgrounds... Yeah, again Shakuras. What's wrong with it if I can drop something in the middle of the map. As long as it is not a retarted early game imbalanced position you either can avoid that position, or deal with it.
no good reason to add it, unless you just want to make terran stronger (hello deadwing) Show nested quote +
8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold for bases. Yeah, well that goes on blizzard. Not sure if they are still against it, but yeah, they used to patch this out of maps like Daybreak. Why? What does it break?
it breaks the economy mold, bases are taken in odd paces and screw over any balance( remember FRB? yeah...). not newb friendly. blizzard is still against it. Show nested quote +
XNWT that don't scout enemy bases? Why? The game allows you to scout anything anyways. In this case you are just forced to hide your stuff better or play straight up.
it's about as retarded as having two maphackers play eachother, there's a reason FoW exists. Show nested quote +
Short air distance. Just try it for once. We have Nimbus. Yeah, the map is broken, but on that map the air distance also plays out asymetrical and the map has quite some other issues as well. And you know, I still think the map is playable in all matchups.
...
nimbus has a quite defendable natural, and you still have to cross half the map to get in, true close air is nimbus on crack.
Not one of your arguments has anything to do with balance apart from highground drop off pods. So why even play on different maps. Overgrowth looks pretty balanced, time to play everything on Overgrowth.
|
On October 10 2014 20:12 Big J wrote:
These aren't really experimental. They often have a new feature, but I can blindly tell you that they all feature:
- air distance is long
- ground walking distance same old, same old
- first 3 bases all blue; no mixed bases
- 3rd base is not too open
- normal mineral/gas setup (8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold)
- at least 5 bases per player (though even that is rare these days; it's usually 6-8)
- if XNWT, they are not looking inside the first 3 bases
- not too chokey at key points (force fields)
- not too open (mapmakers don't like that, though it doesn't break anything)
- multiple paths around the map
- main mineral line out of siege range
- no dropable highgrounds around the map
- tiny choke at the main
- small-mid choke at the natural
- reasonably anti-blink
...
I noticed that you conveniently forgot to mention backdoors. Also, on Callisto the main2main air distance is way shorter than on any map that has been in the HotS ladder pool since Klontas Mire. Plus you can "proxy" stargates in your in-base expansion, making it potentially even shorter. Blink also plays out very different than on other maps due to the exposed in-base/backdoor expansion. Also, it's possible to take a gold base as the third in some matchups. And on top of that, the main base, as in the CC/nexus/hatch, is siegable from the natural which may not even be your natural (or third) depending on which of the many possible expansion patterns you choose.
Edit: Forgot to mention that I also made another version of that map with 5 mineral patches and 1 geyser per expansion.
|
sure it has nothing to do with balance, that doesn't make it less fucking retarded and horrible game design, brood lord infestor vs P was 50/50, did that make it fun?
|
On October 10 2014 21:24 Meavis wrote:
sure it has nothing to do with balance, that doesn't make it less fucking retarded and horrible game design, brood lord infestor vs P was 50/50, did that make it fun?
Really ? It wasn't like Z favored ? I thought BL/infest was in favor of Z for every mu
|
On October 10 2014 21:27 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 21:24 Meavis wrote:
sure it has nothing to do with balance, that doesn't make it less fucking retarded and horrible game design, brood lord infestor vs P was 50/50, did that make it fun? Really ? It wasn't like Z favored ? I thought BL/infest was in favor of Z for every mu
You're right, the only way to win for a protoss was to kill the zerg before, aka Soultrain
|
yep, soultrains, pre-hive colossus timing and vortex pulled winrates straight, so much fun right?
|
Oh ok i thought i misremembered that tight.
Well... At least i could kill Terran at that time :p
|
On October 10 2014 21:21 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 21:09 Meavis wrote:On October 10 2014 20:49 Big J wrote:
OK, so what happens when you make a natural a gold base? I don't see how you can predict anything else but "this might not work out", but not any specific problem in any specific matchup. I guess fast expanding is going to be good there, no kidding... How does that break the metagame of fast expanding? no good reason to add it makes 2 base play even more stronger than 1 base play, further killing any early game action which is all ready rare accelerates any lead, destroying comeback potential
What happens when you make a double wide ramp to the main? Terran opens reaper and is safe against early pools. Protoss walls the natural with a FFE and doesn't care about the main ramp size. Or they just gateway expand, in which case they more often than not don't wall the main either. There is nothing that suggest that you MUST be able to wall or forcefield the main ramp. Sure it's easier to defend if you can, but it is not required.
no good reason to add it 4gate 6pool ling bane bust
Main mineral line in siege range. Yeah, unless you put the tank on a cliff, you can probably engage that tank and kill it. If you have ranged units, you can probably just kill the tank from up your ledge.
no good reason to add it either completely broken or useless, there is no mid ground
Multiple paths around the map. Do we need that? Shakuras wasn't really broken because of it. And hell, it played out differently, exactly what a map should do. Play out different from another.
shakuras WAS broken because of it, it's the main reason why shakuras didn't stand the test of time, it was to easy to great wall of PF/spines the middle
No dropable highgrounds... Yeah, again Shakuras. What's wrong with it if I can drop something in the middle of the map. As long as it is not a retarted early game imbalanced position you either can avoid that position, or deal with it.
no good reason to add it, unless you just want to make terran stronger (hello deadwing)
8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold for bases. Yeah, well that goes on blizzard. Not sure if they are still against it, but yeah, they used to patch this out of maps like Daybreak. Why? What does it break?
it breaks the economy mold, bases are taken in odd paces and screw over any balance( remember FRB? yeah...). not newb friendly. blizzard is still against it.
XNWT that don't scout enemy bases? Why? The game allows you to scout anything anyways. In this case you are just forced to hide your stuff better or play straight up.
it's about as retarded as having two maphackers play eachother, there's a reason FoW exists.
Short air distance. Just try it for once. We have Nimbus. Yeah, the map is broken, but on that map the air distance also plays out asymetrical and the map has quite some other issues as well. And you know, I still think the map is playable in all matchups.
...
nimbus has a quite defendable natural, and you still have to cross half the map to get in, true close air is nimbus on crack. Not one of your arguments has anything to do with balance apart from highground drop off pods. So why even play on different maps. Overgrowth looks pretty balanced, time to play everything on Overgrowth.
Making 2 base all-ins stronger has something to do with balance.
Making great walls of static D because only one path on the map has something to do with balance.
Short air distance may have to do with balance depending of its shortness.
8m2g bases may have to do with balance because the game is balanced around it, so if used non-standard bases have to be used with caution.
And anyway no one is suggesting to play everything on Overgrowth. Maybe maps featuring what you propose will appear soon, and maybe excellent mapmakers will find a way to make them work in a balanced manner. That doesn't change anything to the fact that the maps that I linked (and many others) are indeed new and innovative compared to the current map pool and of course compared to the vintage map pool we are going to get ; and that it would be good to give these maps (and many others) a chance to be played by high-level players.
|
On October 09 2014 22:41 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2014 21:50 kinsky wrote:
can somone pls link the result page? it doenst load for me for some reason. Right there
Thank you!
|
On October 10 2014 21:24 And G wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2014 20:12 Big J wrote:
These aren't really experimental. They often have a new feature, but I can blindly tell you that they all feature:
- air distance is long
- ground walking distance same old, same old
- first 3 bases all blue; no mixed bases
- 3rd base is not too open
- normal mineral/gas setup (8/2 for blue, 6/2 for gold)
- at least 5 bases per player (though even that is rare these days; it's usually 6-8)
- if XNWT, they are not looking inside the first 3 bases
- not too chokey at key points (force fields)
- not too open (mapmakers don't like that, though it doesn't break anything)
- multiple paths around the map
- main mineral line out of siege range
- no dropable highgrounds around the map
- tiny choke at the main
- small-mid choke at the natural
- reasonably anti-blink
... I noticed that you conveniently forgot to mention backdoors. Also, on Callisto the main2main air distance is way shorter than on any map that has been in the HotS ladder pool since Klontas Mire. Plus you can e.g. "proxy" stargates in your in-base expansion, making it potentially even shorter. Blink also plays out very different than on other maps due to the exposed in-base/backdoor expansion. Also, it's possible to take a gold base as the third in some matchups. And on top of that, the main base, as in the CC/nexus/hatch, is siegable from the natural which may not even be your natural (or third) depending on which of the many possible expansion patterns you choose.
I might not give the maps enough credit to be completely honest. Some do have the one or other feature that is quite new (though Callisto main2main air distance is kind of Habitation Station, no?)
Also even if they are not experimental, some of them (Expedition Lost for example) just look like extremely well done and fun standard maps. It's really not like I don't want standard maps, I rather really like them and prefer them over other stuff. But I think that maps do not use their full potential currently and quotes like Meavis show why.
Imo, first we have to play the features and maps (half of the time it is not the features that are broken, it is the map that is broken anyways; e.g. in the case of shakuras, the problem wasn't the drop pods or the turtling, the problem was that one side - Terran - got to turtle like described while the other side had to counterturtle with 2 less expansions; obviously, this gives no incentive for the Terran side to ever do anything else), then we should decide whether they are
a) broken
b) not fun
c) indifferent
d) refreshing
@Meavis
I think there is really no point arguing mapdiversity with someone who admits that gold bases at the natural might not be broken (to be honest, I think they would but who knows? First we try, then we learn!), but they necessarily lead to bad gameplay... how do we know that? This feature is so experimental and unexplored. No way you can make a prediction about its details.
Not to mention that I'm kind of baffled to read comments about how the game doesn't feature early aggression. I'm sorry, when I hit the ladder and hit a ZvZ, 50% chance I get 10pooled from a diamond/master player. PvP is one base. TvT is 90% that one of the players goes for a starport before expansion. TvZ is 20% chance for a two rax or 8/8/8. 10% chance that you hit someone who is still trying to make a reactor hellion expand or a banshee expand or even a 2port banshee work. 33% that someone hellbat rushing, regardless of openings.
ZvP I have 25% chance to get canonrushed or 2gated. If not that, I have 50% chance I get sentry/Immortaled or 4-7gated with or without blink. I'm not sure about the TvP ladder metagame. Last time I played it, I got cheesed all along from Protoss players.
So no, early aggression is really strong on the maps we have. Even at the prolevel in TvZ which is said to be a little slow early on we regularily see 2raxes, roach and baneling rushes. Yes, some stuff is from 2bases. This is how the game works with zerg, given that they need a second hatchery just for production reasons and given that you can take that hatchery at your natural base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
