|
Before you start: These are the writers own opinions, not necessary facts about the state of the maps. Criticism is welcomed, and is encouraged, that being the sole purpose of this topic-determining the state of the maps and how good they are.
Lets start with a poll to see what maps you thumb down most:
Poll: The map you thumb down first(2) Desert Oasis (106) 59% (2) BListering Sands (30) 17% (4) Kulas Ravine (16) 9% (2) Scrap Station (13) 7% (2) Steps of war (8) 4% (4) Metalopolis (4) 2% (4) Lost Temple (3) 2% 180 total votes Your vote: The map you thumb down first (Vote): (2) BListering Sands (Vote): (2) Desert Oasis (Vote): (2) Scrap Station (Vote): (2) Steps of war (Vote): (4) Lost Temple (Vote): (4) Metalopolis (Vote): (4) Kulas Ravine
In my opinion, the maps are horrible, and seriously unbalanced. Every map favors a certain race and a certain way of playing. They don't have an established pattern, rather every map has some feature to make it distinct amongst the map pool as if they want to try everything out and see what works. Well, if that is the case, let me state my opinion and lets do a simple vote for every map.
(2) Blistering Sands This map is horrible, like every other 2 player map, it promotes cheese and all in builds. Aside from that it has a a back door in your main blocked only by some destructible rocks. While this has generated a few interesting games and strategies it is my opinion that this is silly, it gives and advantage to the race having map control early game and puts the other at a disadvantage by investing in infrastructure for defence.
Poll: Do you like blistering sandsYes (118) 67% No (58) 33% 176 total votes Your vote: Do you like blistering sands (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Do you think the destrroyable rocks should be removed?No (136) 78% Yse (38) 22% 174 total votes Your vote: Do you think the destrroyable rocks should be removed? (Vote): Yse (Vote): No
Poll: Should the map be removed from the map pool altogeather?No (127) 82% Yes (27) 18% 154 total votes Your vote: Should the map be removed from the map pool altogeather? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
(2) Incineration Zone IMO another horrible map. The Rush distance is very small, it also has a back door. Adding to that, the whole map is composed of narrow chokes and corridors, making micro very difficult and adding to the potency of AOE, giving rise to some imbalances, but what bugs me most is the distance and cheese friendliness of the map.
Poll: Do you like Incineration ZoneNo (120) 70% Yes (51) 30% 171 total votes Your vote: Do you like Incineration Zone (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Do you think the map should be enlarged?Yes (115) 79% No (31) 21% 146 total votes Your vote: Do you think the map should be enlarged? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Sohuld the corridors and chokes be wider?Yes (90) 66% No (47) 34% 137 total votes Your vote: Sohuld the corridors and chokes be wider? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Should the back door be removed?No (109) 81% Yes (25) 19% 134 total votes Your vote: Should the back door be removed? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Should the map be removed from the map pool altogeather?No (72) 55% Yes (59) 45% 131 total votes Your vote: Should the map be removed from the map pool altogeather? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
(2) Desert Oasis I dislike this one the most. Its a big map with bases very close by air, but very far by land. It makes zerg able to scout easy with an Ovie, and it promotes air harrass and fast units. Since there are 2 long ways to the enemy, moving a mobile army from one side to the other can force the opponent in a deffencive stance and allow you to expland like crazy on your side while denying the same to your opponent. It favors the more mobile of the races in every MU. All this being said, i hate this map, i have no idea how to make it good (in my opinion) so the pool question regarding it shall be few.
Poll: Do you like deser oasisNo (107) 74% Yes (38) 26% 145 total votes Your vote: Do you like deser oasis (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Should "something" be done to make this map better?Yes (96) 73% No (36) 27% 132 total votes Your vote: Should "something" be done to make this map better? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
Poll: Should this map be removed from the map pool?Yes (84) 60% No (57) 40% 141 total votes Your vote: Should this map be removed from the map pool? (Vote): Yes (Vote): No
I have some RL things to take care of, so i don't have the time to finish this thread with every map, but i will, as soon as time presents itself add my opinion about the rest of the maps and add opinion polls.
Vote and comment.
|
and why doesn't this poll have incineration zone again?
|
Kinda odd to me to see Blistering Sands hate. I think it's one of the most balanced maps besides some configurations of the 4 player maps. There's plenty of room to exploit mobility, the map isn't too big so early aggression is an option, and 3rds require map control to take. but are defend-able.
|
The maps are bad. They're too small and they have too much going on. Simplicity is often better.
Blizzard doesn't seem to have any rationale for designing maps the way they do. Instead, you get the impression that map designers are thinking: "here's something different, I'll put that in this map." However you don't get the impression that any of the map makers actually had a decent picture of SC2 in mind when they were working.
Here's hoping that Blizzard rapidly adopts or mimcs custom maps made by players who have some understanding of the game.
|
On June 04 2010 00:25 k!llua wrote: and why doesn't this poll have incineration zone again?
Ups. Edit: Is there a way to add it in?
|
On June 04 2010 00:25 k!llua wrote: and why doesn't this poll have incineration zone again?
It was removed from the ladder. Why do you you phrase your question like a douchebag?
|
There are a few typos in your polls.
|
What I would like to see is map opinion by race. If I was playing terran there is no way in hell I want to play on desert oasis. That being said, something like steppes of war is a nightmare for Z vs T.
|
On June 04 2010 00:26 Logo wrote: Kinda odd to me to see Blistering Sands hate. I think it's one of the most balanced maps besides some configurations of the 4 player maps. There's plenty of room to exploit mobility, the map isn't too big so early aggression is an option, and 3rds require map control to take. but are defend-able.
The rocks in the main surrounded by an obligatory curtain of bushes are a major issue. I have no idea why Blizzard insisted on this feature, but it was obviously a bad idea. Anyone with a working knowledge of SCBW would have known that destructible rocks into the main would not work in that game or this one. It's surprising and disappointing that Blizzard didn't realize this (and went on to create Incineration Zone).
|
On June 04 2010 00:30 Wr3k wrote: What I would like to see is map opinion by race. If I was playing terran there is no way in hell I want to play on desert oasis. That being said, something like steppes of war is a nightmare for Z vs T.
It had crossed my mind, but there are a lot of problems with that. How do you know only players of the given race will respond to their questions, and how to phrase them exactly? ("Do you like playing as T vs Z on DS?" That doesn't really tell us much.)
|
I don't mind the maps in the current map pool, I just wish there were a couple that were put in as larger macro maps with some wider, less cluttered battle field areas. I don't think every map should be that way, though. I like having variety - with some maps having the destructible rocks, such as Blistering Sands, and some maps having close rush distances, like Steppes of War.
|
incineration zone = auto-lose for Zerg. That map needs a serious overhaul. Remove the golden minerals in the middle, put them behind the destructible rocks, and make that old gold mineral patch lava.
desert oasis just sucks because of the far undefendable natural, other than that I'm okay with the map
Blistering sands I will say is one of the best maps Blizzard has made. It's a good strategic, mid-sized map. It's by far one of the most fun maps to play on.
Though I will say the BEST map Blizzard made for SC2 is Metalopolis. It's simple, dynamic, and straightforward. The only downside is that there's no island expos, which I'm not even crying about .
Oh and Steppes (or steeps? lol @ tesla from last nights cast) is just really.. really small. It's a bitch to ZvP/T on this map.
|
where's inceniration zone in the map you tumbs down first ?
|
On June 04 2010 00:28 Failsafe wrote: The maps are bad. They're too small and they have too much going on. Simplicity is often better.
Blizzard doesn't seem to have any rationale for designing maps the way they do. Instead, you get the impression that map designers are thinking: "here's something different, I'll put that in this map." However you don't get the impression that any of the map makers actually had a decent picture of SC2 in mind when they were working.
Here's hoping that Blizzard rapidly adopts or mimcs custom maps made by players who have some understanding of the game.
To be fair when the maps were designed SC2 had very different balance. People need to remember that the maps are developed alongside the initial game. It's not like the game is perfectly balanced then suddenly a bunch of maps are made.
Likewise there's a good chance that Blizzard wanted the game to be balanced across the set of maps we have right now (which isn't the case, but that's another point).
Though I will say the BEST map Blizzard made for SC2 is Metalopolis. It's simple, dynamic, and straightforward. The only downside is that there's no island expos, which I'm not even crying about .
Eh, I don't know. Metalopolis can go from zerg favored (diagonal or back to back positions) to a pretty hard match for zerg (across like the top left and bottom left positions). Being able to expand away from your opponent is a huge benefit for zerg in the current state of balance.
|
On June 04 2010 00:34 StoLiVe wrote: where's inceniration zone in the map you tumbs down first ?
It's removed from the ladder.
|
Even though I hate playing on some of these maps, I wouldn't want to change a thing, since I really appreicate some of the really good matches that has been played on said maps.
I think of it, as everyone has their preference maps based on their play style - Some maps favor some things, others don't.
And if 75% of all players hate Desert Oasis/Incineration Zone, then I guess it's pretty much just up to you as a player how you are going deal with that, since there is a good chance that your opponent feels the same way :D
|
We need much more creative maps, the SC2 ladder maps currently are quite boring, and have o real "special" techniques
|
About incineration zone i think it would help a LOT if they put destructible rocks in the shortest way between bases so that if you wanna rush you have to take longer way, it would be cool map with that change IMO
|
On June 04 2010 00:38 ELA wrote: Even though I hate playing on some of these maps, I wouldn't want to change a thing, since I really appreicate some of the really good matches that has been played on said maps.
I think of it, as everyone has their preference maps based on their play style - Some maps favor some things, others don't.
And if 75% of all players hate Desert Oasis/Incineration Zone, then I guess it's pretty much just up to you as a player how you are going deal with that, since there is a good chance that your opponent feels the same way :D
The problem is that on B-net you an thumb them down, but lets say there is a tournament and you are forced to play these bad maps.
|
I say don't worry. There will be many more maps with when the game comes out. Although I do agree some maps really favor one race over the other. Metalopolis should be just called Zerg Land lol I still love all the maps (minus Inceneration zone) Lost Temple owns
|
|
|
|