On April 08 2021 13:56 [Phantom] wrote: Wait People hated Deathaura? That one was one of the only maps that wasn't zerg favored, without asinine ans shameless design decisitons to help zerg like an invisible overlord spot over your natural. Zergs actually had to scout early.
I personally really liked the map EXCEPT for the cannon rushes. So I definitely dont hate it but its a big flaw!
Blackburn LE is going to produce some peak PvP Starcraft...
Gemini complained about that during the contest, but none of these spots are that bad individually imo--there's just a lot of them. It's not much worse than say Ephemeron.
It's the sheer number of adjacent positions that's the problem.
If I make a Pylon in the middle position against the cliff-edge, it is going to power four different Cannon locations. If I make a Pylon in the middle position behind the minerals, it is going to power three different Cannon locations. For the cost of two Pylons, the Cannon rusher forces their opponent to pull seven Probes to block Cannon placement and/or attack the Pylons directly. This is on top of the two defensive Probes that should be attack-commanded onto each offensive Probe regardless of the map.
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a Cannon rusher, it's right there in my signature, but I'm still going to be vetoing this map because it's too much of a meme.
I haven't played much of the new maps, but I feel like the maps are kind of zerg unfavored. I guess I should adapt my playstyle, maybe go for drops on Blackburns as zerg, but in my current playstyle, it feels rough.
Blackburn LE is going to produce some peak PvP Starcraft...
Gemini complained about that during the contest, but none of these spots are that bad individually imo--there's just a lot of them. It's not much worse than say Ephemeron.
It's the sheer number of adjacent positions that's the problem.
If I make a Pylon in the middle position against the cliff-edge, it is going to power four different Cannon locations. If I make a Pylon in the middle position behind the minerals, it is going to power three different Cannon locations. For the cost of two Pylons, the Cannon rusher forces their opponent to pull seven Probes to block Cannon placement and/or attack the Pylons directly. This is on top of the two defensive Probes that should be attack-commanded onto each offensive Probe regardless of the map.
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a Cannon rusher, it's right there in my signature, but I'm still going to be vetoing this map because it's too much of a meme.
Oh I'm aware. I just don't think those types of cannon rushes based on the main's cliffing have been much of a problem in the past.
These spots are much better for dedicated cannon rushers than pros admittedly (since they give a lot of flexibility against an opponent that expects you to cannon rush every time and tries to blind counter), but that's fine imo.
Blackburn LE is going to produce some peak PvP Starcraft...
Gemini complained about that during the contest, but none of these spots are that bad individually imo--there's just a lot of them. It's not much worse than say Ephemeron.
It's the sheer number of adjacent positions that's the problem.
If I make a Pylon in the middle position against the cliff-edge, it is going to power four different Cannon locations. If I make a Pylon in the middle position behind the minerals, it is going to power three different Cannon locations. For the cost of two Pylons, the Cannon rusher forces their opponent to pull seven Probes to block Cannon placement and/or attack the Pylons directly. This is on top of the two defensive Probes that should be attack-commanded onto each offensive Probe regardless of the map.
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a Cannon rusher, it's right there in my signature, but I'm still going to be vetoing this map because it's too much of a meme.
Oh I'm aware. I just don't think those types of cannon rushes based on the main's cliffing have been much of a problem in the past.
These spots are much better for dedicated cannon rushers than pros admittedly (since they give a lot of flexibility against an opponent that expects you to cannon rush every time and tries to blind counter), but that's fine imo.
They are problem on the ladder. if people were sick of the old maps because they were old(and because they were Submarine), you won't help the cause by adding a map which is a cannon rushers heaven
Sure, pros won't care, but the ladder population will and it's not like Protoss need a buff in that departement
On April 07 2021 08:49 Jandos wrote: I just came back after like 7 years pause from starcraft and I am wondering why are all the maps only two positions ? (1v1) What happened to 4 position maps which are pretty much standard in broodwar. It just promote cheez and cannon rushes 24/7
The 12 worker start in LotV makes it so that there is much less time for scouting before an early rush hits, so 4 player maps are annoying to play at best and awful and not viable at worse. For comparison, imagine playing on a 12 spawn map in BW and having to scout for a 10/15 opening in time.
i think we need to re introduce 4 position maps or 3 position maps, people has been able to improve their scouting and reaction by now. its plain borring to have maps re skin over and over because diversity is very limited.
On April 12 2021 22:01 BonitiilloO wrote: this maps are just re skin of old maps.
Can you say which old maps the new maps are the reskins of?
Ever_Dream = Beckett_Industries
same layaout just minor tweaks
Have you even played the maps? Or watched the maps, or done anything other than lazily and superficially glancing at the overview pic? Beckett plays out completely differently than Ever Dream by virture of being way too small.
On April 12 2021 22:01 BonitiilloO wrote: this maps are just re skin of old maps.
Can you say which old maps the new maps are the reskins of?
Ever_Dream = Beckett_Industries
same layaout just minor tweaks
Have you even played the maps? Or watched the maps, or done anything other than lazily and superficially glancing at the overview pic? Beckett plays out completely differently than Ever Dream by virture of being way too small.
I can see the comparison in terms of the layout of the first four bases, but yeah Beckett's very much a different map than Ever Dream otherwise.
Harstem mentioning that Beckett was made by a terran player makes that map make a lot more sense. There are so many good tank spots on it and small chokes that terran could do tank pushes through.
On April 12 2021 22:01 BonitiilloO wrote: this maps are just re skin of old maps.
Can you say which old maps the new maps are the reskins of?
Ever_Dream = Beckett_Industries
same layaout just minor tweaks
Have you even played the maps? Or watched the maps, or done anything other than lazily and superficially glancing at the overview pic? Beckett plays out completely differently than Ever Dream by virture of being way too small.
I can see the comparison in terms of the layout of the first four bases, but yeah Beckett's very much a different map than Ever Dream otherwise.
Harstem mentioning that Beckett was made by a terran player makes that map make a lot more sense. There are so many good tank spots on it and small chokes that terran could do tank pushes through.
It's not though--superouman doesn't play Terran afaik (he plays Zerg and Protoss), and the race a mapmaker plays honestly doesn't make a difference in a map. I do agree that the map has problems though (and had said so 14 months ago for that matter).
On April 12 2021 22:01 BonitiilloO wrote: this maps are just re skin of old maps.
Can you say which old maps the new maps are the reskins of?
Ever_Dream = Beckett_Industries
same layaout just minor tweaks
Have you even played the maps? Or watched the maps, or done anything other than lazily and superficially glancing at the overview pic? Beckett plays out completely differently than Ever Dream by virture of being way too small.
I can see the comparison in terms of the layout of the first four bases, but yeah Beckett's very much a different map than Ever Dream otherwise.
Harstem mentioning that Beckett was made by a terran player makes that map make a lot more sense. There are so many good tank spots on it and small chokes that terran could do tank pushes through.
It's not though--superouman doesn't play Terran afaik (he plays Zerg and Protoss), and the race a mapmaker plays honestly doesn't make a difference in a map. I do agree that the map has problems though (and had said so 14 months ago for that matter).
Yeah I was mistaken. I went back and checked and he basically said that the map seemed like it was created by a terran who posts on the battlenet forum and that if you asked every terran on that forum what they wanted in a map they'd end up with Beckett. How he worded the first bit of what he said made it a bit confusing and made it seem like he was being literal.
I had Oxide, Pillars of Gold and Submarine vetoed last season so I had two spare vetoes right off the bat. Beckett and Blackburn have such severe issues that they were no-brainers. After I'd done that, it came down to a straight fight between Oxide and 2000 Atmospheres. Oxide barely won out, but I'll probably change my mind a few times before the season ends.
In any case, this was really underwhelming after all the waiting...
On April 13 2021 20:18 MarianoSC2 wrote: Is it just me or are all the new maps T and P favored?
That is generally the case with new maps until Zergs figure out the optimum strategies for the maps.
I totally agree on this comment. Also in the beginning of each patch or when new maps are released allins are strong, since it takes time to figure out how to hold them and what to scout for. I think to really come to a conclusion we have to wait and play the maps a little bit longer. In the first two weeks some maps might favor one race but after a month it can turn out that it is the opposite way.
EPT![[image loading]](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/219838502202900480/829306035797360660/6e5f005d446a3ed6aeb8c1ae557961f3.jpg?width=948&height=546)
