| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
geokilla
Canada8240 Posts
On March 25 2015 05:38 [PkF] Wire wrote: I would be OK to switch it for Catallena or even Deadwing... Or, better, Ganymede or any other TLMC5 map. Or Bel'shir Vestige. Or Metalopolis. Anything but Inferno Pools. How about Metropolis? | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1926 Posts
| ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On March 25 2015 04:20 [PkF] Wire wrote: 4 players maps with all spawns enabled create a luck factor in scouting that shouldn't ever exist. You scout a 10 gate 3 gates last in PvP ? You've lost until you opened with an overly safe build that gets behind against anything else. I really think all spawns enabled should not exist. I think I disagree. 2 spawns maps makes the meta a bit too rigid imho, having a few 4 spawns can allow builds that wouldn't work otherwise and leaves so doors open to further development of the metagame. I'm not sure about your PvP example for instance : let's imagine you're right and that scouting it last is auto loose (which I m not even sure of but whatever) we can also assume that scouting it first or second gives you all the time you need to counter and be ahead. So actually how many people open 10 gate 3 gate on 4 spawns map? not many I suppose, and I don't remember having seen this on a pro game for a long time, did I miss something? Having a few 3-4 spawns maps allows different builds and let the game evolve. Regarding Inferno, the issue for everybody seems to be the short rush distance on horizontal spawns. But you can't really abuse this cause 2/3 of the time an ultra agressive build will fail miserably. I see nothing wrong in 2in1 maps, a big macro map with a chance of ultra fast and agressive game is cool idea. The questionning design is the width of the natural ramp, maybe it could be reduced silghtly (it's not wider than on merry go round though I think?) The 4th could be better too, esp for Zergs... Personnaly, I'd love to see some maps revamped every now and then, rather than just havng them removed and replaced. Design could mature and adapt to the evolution of the meta, with small changes and subtle tuning to converge toward the "perfect map" Just like Newkirk Precinct which was bad at start and ended up being much better once the bottom center part was rearranged. If they did this for Inferno, it could end up being a good map, better than Alterzim and Deadwing at least... | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24202 Posts
On March 25 2015 06:25 Gwavajuice wrote: Personnaly, I'd love to see some maps revamped every now and then, rather than just havng them removed and replaced. Design could mature and adapt to the evolution of the meta, with small changes and subtle tuning to converge toward the "perfect map" Just like Newkirk Precinct which was bad at start and ended up being much better once the bottom center part was rearranged. If they did this for Inferno, it could end up being a good map, better than Alterzim and Deadwing at least... I could agree to some extent, but why rework a mediocre map when a lot of solid ones exist ? | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
On March 25 2015 06:13 royalroadweed wrote: I wish maps used enriched geysers more often. trust me they would, except blizz doesn't allow them on ladder | ||
|
Magnifico
1958 Posts
I think Blizzard will do something after this reaction. | ||
|
ivancype
Brazil485 Posts
| ||
|
MorDka
Poland543 Posts
| ||
|
MidnightZL
Sweden203 Posts
Inferno Pools, everything else seems fine. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24202 Posts
On March 25 2015 07:22 Tiaraju9 wrote: The reaction around Inferno Pools is really telling. Reddit, TL, Battle.net foruns, pro gamers... Everyone hates this map. I think Blizzard will do something after this reaction. I hope so. They did react quite quickly last time for a faaaar better map (Foxtrot Labs) so I'm pretty sure they'll get rid of that shame of a map soon (which, by Blizzard standards, could mean next season though). | ||
|
Elentos
55550 Posts
On March 25 2015 07:25 ivancype wrote: If in Inferno Pools, the natural expo's size was smaller, and the the distance to the 3rd (the expo closer to the main base) were shorter and the map was cross only, would it be at least a decent map? Cross is so far away that it's incredibly imbalanced against Terran (I guess bio more so than mech, but still). | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
On March 25 2015 07:32 [PkF] Wire wrote: I hope so. They did react quite quickly last time for a faaaar better map (Foxtrot Labs) so I'm pretty sure they'll get rid of that shame of a map soon (which, by Blizzard standards, could mean next season though). the difference being that this time its a blizzard map and they have to much of an ego to let go of their maps. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24202 Posts
On March 25 2015 07:41 Meavis wrote: the difference being that this time its a blizzard map and they have to much of an ego to let go of their maps. I think Blizzard has shown a lot of times recently that they're more willing to admit their mistakes than before, the sh rework being one of numerous examples. I'm pretty confident Inferno Pools won't be in season 2 map pool in the end (and Overgrowth will make another season, hurray...  ). | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
| ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
On March 25 2015 08:13 Fatam wrote: Should have kept overgrowth (solid standard-ish map) and got rid of inferno pools. how about no and fuck you, this is the kind of attitude that keeps the same maps around for years, do you need to be reminded of daybreak/ohana/cloud kingdom and how much damage that did for viewership? there was even a thread on this this very day. this is probably the least worst outcome blizzard couldve gone with whilst keeping their silly rules intact, even though id much rather see them abandon those. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Flopgun
Germany274 Posts
| ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
I think they're keeping inferno pools as a way to keep trying out some different map features (close to your opponent 3rds, optional gold 3rds, island bases) which is a good thing in that they're willing to keep trying different features. The bad thing is that inferno pools itself is just this weird amalgamation of features that haven't worked on other maps in the past. Normally if you include a broken feature like an island base (good for terran) you'd then also make concessions elsewhere in the map that would counteract at least some of the weirdness/imbalance of that feature. With Inferno pools I think they said "Oh, highground 3rds good for toss, islands good for terran, gold bases good for zerg." in an attempt to do this, but instead it just ends up as this jambalaya where the ingredients don't complement each other like they were intended to. At least they're willing to try it though. | ||
|
HOLUCOW
8 Posts
| ||
|
HOLUCOW
8 Posts
On March 25 2015 08:13 Fatam wrote: Should have kept overgrowth (solid standard-ish map) and got rid of inferno pools. Never!!! Overgrowth surely is a good map but having it for this season was already to much. Games on this map are just boring because Overgrowth has been in the map pool since season 2 2014. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
Rex10
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
