EPTPotential Map Balance Changes Next Week - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
EngrishTeacher
Canada1109 Posts
| ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24211 Posts
| ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
On February 03 2016 07:55 [PkF] Wire wrote: Am I the only one to think the gold natural approach is very risky ? No I posted the same concern on the first page. I don't think this solves anything but switch from being Zerg favor to being Protoss/Terran favored. I don't know what it will do to PvT but I don't even think its a problem, unless you're sOs | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On February 03 2016 07:55 [PkF] Wire wrote: Am I the only one to think the gold natural approach is very risky ? I think it will favour 2 base all-in play from non-zerg races. | ||
|
wjat
385 Posts
| ||
|
itsMAHVELbaybee
292 Posts
2) land at natural 3) profit Don't think its a good idea unless you do something about the natural ramp. At the moment it takes 3 buildings to block. | ||
|
A_needle_jog
Korea (South)699 Posts
 | ||
|
Lockenshade
2 Posts
But at least they are trying to fix their stupidity... | ||
|
phantomfive
Korea (South)404 Posts
On February 02 2016 16:46 ejozl wrote: It had the Gold that Zerg could take, even offensively with Spinecrawler rush. It had the behind the natural area where you can place Siege Tanks, Pylon to warp in and the likes. And it had no Blink area entering the main. It also had a very defensive 4th. I know what you mean though, it was a fine map, but for my liking it was in the map pool for way too long. It's really not up there as one of the best IMO. Those were things that made interesting games, IMO | ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
And btw, I'm preparing my anus for these map selections that Blizzard is going to be handling. Not favoring standard maps in favor of maps like Ulrena and Prion? Oh man -___- Wanna know what the interesting feature of Overgrowth was? It was that it was super balanced across the board and it became a standard because of it. | ||
| ||
