|
Hey everyone! We’ve been listening to your feedback regarding the multiplayer maps, and we want to talk about some changes we’re making during the February 8th update to address it all:
On Backwater, players have trouble reaching un-upgraded Liberators at the closed-in third base expansion location. We’re adjusted the terrain to open more pathable space to allow units to respond to unupgraded Liberators. Also, sieged Siege Tanks will no longer be able to attack structures located at the third base expansion. We increased the size of unpathable areas to prevent Siege Tanks from reaching these structures.
We’re also going to improve the visibility of underwater creep on the map. Zerg players (as well as their opponents) should be able to gauge the creep-spread more effectively.
Lastly, on the 3v3 map Snowbound Colony, starting locations will be corrected. Once the update is live, players will start at the proper locations.
We were also alerted by a community post that Siege Tanks in tank form will send out attack notifications when they look at their target before firing. We are fixing this issue—Siege Tanks will no longer send attack notifications before firing, and thus will no longer prematurely reveal themselves to the enemy.
We’re aiming to get this update out on February 8 after IEM PyeonChang, but this schedule is subject to change. As always, thanks for your continued interest and please continue giving us feedback on any community forums. A summary of the changes is below.
Backwater LE
• Increased the pathable terrain areas at the closed-in third base expansion to allow ground units to attack unupgraded Liberators sieging minerals lines.
• Changed ground pathing by adding unpathable terrain near the closed-in third base expansion to prevent Siege Tanks from reaching and firing on nearby base structures.
• Improved visibility of creep located underwater.
Snowbound Colony
• Starting locations adjusted to the correct locations.
Siege Tank
• Bug fix: Siege tanks in tank form will no longer send out attack notifications to the enemy before firing.
Source: https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20761736632
|
Kudos for the quick reaction, but still I think these maps should be proof-tested better before releasing them to play in tournaments,
|
On February 06 2018 04:27 Xamo wrote:
Kudos for the quick reaction, but still I think these maps should be proof-tested better before releasing them to play in tournaments,
We literally had a tournament with Backwater.
Maybe players should help us test maps instead of just waiting and expecting everything to be A okay as if we were gods?
|
On February 06 2018 09:03 Avexyli wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2018 04:27 Xamo wrote:
Kudos for the quick reaction, but still I think these maps should be proof-tested better before releasing them to play in tournaments, We literally had a tournament with Backwater. Maybe players should help us test maps instead of just waiting and expecting everything to be A okay as if we were gods?
You are no gods?
|
that's all???
edit: they fixed liberators spot on 3rd, nice!
|
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough.
|
On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough.
Actually really fucking hard when you're working alone.
See avex's response above
|
On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough.
Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!"
|
I think it's safe to say from here on out, EVERYONE knows that liberators are a thing. If you forget, it's on you. If you get shit from players for forgetting, deal with it and maybe try remembering for next map 
|
On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!"
I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no.
|
On February 06 2018 09:03 Avexyli wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2018 04:27 Xamo wrote:
Kudos for the quick reaction, but still I think these maps should be proof-tested better before releasing them to play in tournaments, We literally had a tournament with Backwater. Maybe players should help us test maps instead of just waiting and expecting everything to be A okay as if we were gods?
It was not my intention to put the burden on map makers. A company like Blizzard has profesional testers, they should have a better/ longer? QA process for maps.
|
Do community maps make it into ladder? Thats pretty cool if thats the case
|
On February 07 2018 16:10 GrandTerran wrote:
Do community maps make it into ladder? Thats pretty cool if thats the case
Community maps have been on ladder for years. So yes. 
|
On February 07 2018 16:20 blunderfulguy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 16:10 GrandTerran wrote:
Do community maps make it into ladder? Thats pretty cool if thats the case Community maps have been on ladder for years. So yes.
Wow thats so cool
|
Hmm, so it s time to un-ban Backwater?
|
On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough.
Isn't that why we don't play on maps submitted to TLMC, but on their LE variants instead? When blizz puts their LE stamp on something, it should be ladder ready, I can see why a map creator will rather create cool ideas for a map, rather than spend hours by moving liberators and tanks inch by inch, building different structures everywhere and test which unit can and can't attack which other unit...
|
I have 2 favorite things about what's happening in SC2 right now. 1 is new kinds of terrain like the "swiss cheese" path blockers on Neon Violet Square, the other is that we're seeing some 2v2 high level action on BasetradeTV and some other places.
I hope these are two trends that continue!
|
On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no.
You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content.
Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer.
Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results.
|
On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results.
How is it relevant if he ever made a map himself? Can you not question the design faults of a Ford Pinto without being a car maker yourself?
I don't see the issue with his comment. If anything the liberator abuse should've been caught during Blizzard testing, but feel free to explain why it's so hard to check this rather than throwing snark on this person.
|
Consciensly or not mapmakers do maps good for their race.
|
On February 11 2018 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results. How is it relevant if he ever made a map himself? Can you not question the design faults of a Ford Pinto without being a car maker yourself? I don't see the issue with his comment. If anything the liberator abuse should've been caught during Blizzard testing, but feel free to explain why it's so hard to check this rather than throwing snark on this person.
We can assume that Blizzard believed that it is overpowered to always have a queen in range of a liberator. Just maybe at some point map makers taught that it would be a good idea to force players build their own air units rather than rely solely on ground units in order to protect against liberator siege mode. Now where is the problem ? Well the players dont like to build air units to counter other air units so something that was designed to make players build air units turned out to be a complete disaster. Obviously if this wouldnt be changed players would be forced to make their own early liberator counters and this would change meta game however people most likely started to complain, if you haven't noticed patches changed the game very very much and so maps could with these kind changes where air units cant be reached by rule of thumb counters such as queen change the way people play the game to the core.
|
On February 11 2018 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results. How is it relevant if he ever made a map himself? Can you not question the design faults of a Ford Pinto without being a car maker yourself? I don't see the issue with his comment. If anything the liberator abuse should've been caught during Blizzard testing, but feel free to explain why it's so hard to check this rather than throwing snark on this person.
I agree it should have been through Blizzard's QA, but this guy is attacking the mapmaker himself and that is the issue.
youngjiddle seems to think making a map is easy and Avex should test every pixel of the map to ensure all unit interactions are perfect.
Mapmakers usually go solo and do this for passion, not for fame or money. They don't have time and money to make sure the map is perfect. youngjiddle obviously hasn't made a map, so my comment is relevant.
He is basically accusing Avex of being lazy, without knowledge of the tasks involved in making a map.
|
On February 12 2018 00:56 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
He is basically accusing Avex of being lazy, without knowledge of the tasks involved in making a map.
Of course. Would he not have the right to claim Ford engineers were lazy not to fix the flaws in their Pinto design that caused it to catch fire whenever there was a rear collision, even if he has no knowledge of the tasks in making a car?
Doing so wouldn't imply that anyone thinks making a car is easy. Similarly I can openly complain about any issues i have with any product i use, such as too few ports on my laptop or a faulty hinge on the screen that breaks after a while.
I don't think anyone suggested testing every pixel of the map. Liberators sieging mineral lines are not unheard of, and you would expect unit interactions to be part of the fundamental design of a map (isn't it what a map is completely about anyway?)
That said I don't want to bash anyones efforts in mapmaking. It's nice to even to this day have fresh maps lining up and people still enjoying making maps. I also recognize that mapmaking efforts are completely voluntary and people should keep this in mind when posting criticism.
|
On February 11 2018 20:16 okright wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2018 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results. How is it relevant if he ever made a map himself? Can you not question the design faults of a Ford Pinto without being a car maker yourself? I don't see the issue with his comment. If anything the liberator abuse should've been caught during Blizzard testing, but feel free to explain why it's so hard to check this rather than throwing snark on this person. We can assume that Blizzard believed that it is overpowered to always have a queen in range of a liberator. Just maybe at some point map makers taught that it would be a good idea to force players build their own air units rather than rely solely on ground units in order to protect against liberator siege mode. Now where is the problem ? Well the players dont like to build air units to counter other air units so something that was designed to make players build air units turned out to be a complete disaster. Obviously if this wouldnt be changed players would be forced to make their own early liberator counters and this would change meta game however people most likely started to complain, if you haven't noticed patches changed the game very very much and so maps could with these kind changes where air units cant be reached by rule of thumb counters such as queen change the way people play the game to the core.
Terrans can have a liberator at 4:30 with a completly macro opener, and you're suggested that zergs don't have spire and air units ready for this timing because they don't like to build air units lol.
|
On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results.
lol don't be so soft, people (adults) can take some criticism. And to your question, I've made sc1 maps but not sc2.
|
On February 11 2018 20:16 okright wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2018 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:On February 11 2018 17:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On February 07 2018 04:42 youngjiddle wrote:On February 07 2018 02:56 Ransomstarcraft wrote:On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough. Yeah, this is a classic case of "I know nothing about this but i'm really willing to complain about it!" I asked a question, how hard (long) does it take for a map maker to siege up and liberator and see if the queen can attack it? realistically, not long no. You asked an asinine question with literally 0 knowledge of the content. Have you ever made a map on SC2 editor? Don't answer it, I already know the answer. Move on and don't be such an ass IRL. You won't like the results. How is it relevant if he ever made a map himself? Can you not question the design faults of a Ford Pinto without being a car maker yourself? I don't see the issue with his comment. If anything the liberator abuse should've been caught during Blizzard testing, but feel free to explain why it's so hard to check this rather than throwing snark on this person. We can assume that Blizzard believed that it is overpowered to always have a queen in range of a liberator. Just maybe at some point map makers taught that it would be a good idea to force players build their own air units rather than rely solely on ground units in order to protect against liberator siege mode. Now where is the problem ? Well the players dont like to build air units to counter other air units so something that was designed to make players build air units turned out to be a complete disaster. Obviously if this wouldnt be changed players would be forced to make their own early liberator counters and this would change meta game however people most likely started to complain, if you haven't noticed patches changed the game very very much and so maps could with these kind changes where air units cant be reached by rule of thumb counters such as queen change the way people play the game to the core.
Look I'm primarily a Terran player I'm biased but even I'm willing to admit that it's totally unreasonable to expect Zerg to have a spire out in time to counter liberators. I hate queen range because of how strong it is vs medivacs but zerg must have a way to deal with early liberator positions for a map to be wven close to balanced. It's just way to hard for zerg to get lair at the same rate Terran can get a starport otherwise.
|
Honestly I would have preferred for the liberator circle to be changed so that it has flat edges or something and doesn't reach so far rather than a queen buff. The less tangible things that queens provide make TvZ very frustrating to me, and I don't want Zergs to be encouraged to make any more of this unit that started out with no ranged attack vs. ground and now has 5 range vs. ground and 8 range vs. air.
|
On February 12 2018 01:59 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2018 00:56 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
He is basically accusing Avex of being lazy, without knowledge of the tasks involved in making a map.
Of course. Would he not have the right to claim Ford engineers were lazy not to fix the flaws in their Pinto design that caused it to catch fire whenever there was a rear collision, even if he has no knowledge of the tasks in making a car? Doing so wouldn't imply that anyone thinks making a car is easy. Similarly I can openly complain about any issues i have with any product i use, such as too few ports on my laptop or a faulty hinge on the screen that breaks after a while. I don't think anyone suggested testing every pixel of the map. Liberators sieging mineral lines are not unheard of, and you would expect unit interactions to be part of the fundamental design of a map (isn't it what a map is completely about anyway?) That said I don't want to bash anyones efforts in mapmaking. It's nice to even to this day have fresh maps lining up and people still enjoying making maps. I also recognize that mapmaking efforts are completely voluntary and people should keep this in mind when posting criticism.
Except he did imply mapmaking is easy with his asinine question.
So you don't want to bash mapmakers, yet you are defending someone who is clearly doing that.
You seem to be contradicting yourself. Please clarify.
|
On February 12 2018 05:33 youngjiddle wrote:
lol don't be so soft, people (adults) can take some criticism. And to your question, I've made sc1 maps but not sc2.
I don't seem to recall you providing actual criticism.
All you asked was:
On February 07 2018 00:29 youngjiddle wrote:
how hard is it for mapmakers to realize when their maps have liberator spots that are abuse-able? Feels like every season maps have to be fixed because they aren't looked at enough.
Please highlight where you provided criticism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
