|
At this point, there has been a general consensus that the blizzard maps are generally imbalanced, usually in favor of Terran. However, something troubles me. Blizzard is making patches based off results of these maps.
In general, most Ladder maps are small, have a relatively open natural, and almost all of them are 2player. This brings up my point: If blizzard is balancing SC2 on these maps, will they become the archetypes? The most entertaining games are always in games where the competitors have room to expand several times, which are always either LT, Kulas Ravine, or Metalopolis. Should small maps like Steppes of War become standard, and will that fare well in SC2's development as a spectator game?
The most common complaints seem to highlight that the real imbalance comes from the maps: Terran being able to put too much pressure on zerg in the early game; games are ending too quickly, and too onesided; Terran being able to turtle too easily...
All of these complaints are side effects of having small maps. another thing to note is that there are multiple units and abilities in the game that allow for frequent reinforcement that can honestly only see use in large maps. Nydus worms and warp prisms are not used simply because just walking towards your opponent is usually faster and more effiecient. The terran still have a slow and immobile army, but that is not important because there is only a few feet from the terran to the opponent.
Another thing of note is that almost all popular competitive maps in BW are quite large, and rather straight forward. I don't pretend to know the history of BW, but honestly, most of the most epic matches in BW wouldn't be nearly as exciting if it wasn't for the fact that the competitors often had several bases to expand to (5+).
That's about all I have to say, but I would like to add on a personal note, that my favorite maps are Lost Temple and Metalopolis for this reason. I believe that, while blizzard is doing a good job of balancing the game, their focus should be on the larger maps, and that they should hasten to add new maps to the ladder, so that they can balance SC2 with a large vocabulary of maps.
Poll: Should Blizzard balance around current maps, or try out new ones?I would like to see Blizzard incorporate larger macro based maps, and balance around them. (363) 82% Blizzard should experiment with new maps in ladder, and balance the maps for the Races. (44) 10% The current maps are fine, and Blizzard should continue as they have been. (20) 5% Blizzard should stop making balance patches, and let user-made maps develop. (17) 4% 444 total votes Your vote: Should Blizzard balance around current maps, or try out new ones? (Vote): The current maps are fine, and Blizzard should continue as they have been.
(Vote): I would like to see Blizzard incorporate larger macro based maps, and balance around them.
(Vote): Blizzard should experiment with new maps in ladder, and balance the maps for the Races.
(Vote): Blizzard should stop making balance patches, and let user-made maps develop.
|
|
|
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that it was generally understood that most Blizzard maps are absolute garbage, not to mention the obvious Terran bias [DEM CLIFFS].
So yeah, it'd be really frightening to think they're balancing the game around said maps.
|
more macro maps will happen due to korean televised gaming which encourages for a more macro style game.
|
I wish Crossfire was in the ladder pool.... whas wrong with Blizzard, letting bad maps in the pool and leaving Peaks of Baekdo out???
Whats frightnening is that they are balancing the game based ONLY in small and bad maps.
Edit: for those who dont know, I present you Peaks of Baekdo:
|
Sigh, I want maps like that to be on the ladder so bad...
|
This is something I've been frustrated about, as well.
If Blizzard balances Zerg, just as an example, on smaller, claustrophobic maps (where they traditionally perform poorly due to lacking room to manuever and react), then Blizzard's shooting down any hopes of adding different types of maps to the pool, because Zerg could become too good on bigger maps.
We'll just be stuck playing on these small, chokepoint-heavy maps =/.
|
I have a lot of mixed feelings about this topic, and don't want to take the time to rant out what I think about it, but I would like to point out that the poll in the OP is pretty biased.
It's basically asking two questions, A - Do you like the maps, and B - Do you like the way Blizzard is patching the game.
These two issues are intertwined, which is the point of the thread, but the questions themselves are seperate. There's no option for saying "I like the patches, but I don't like the maps" or "I don't like the patches, but I do like the maps".
What you do have is one "I love everything Blizzard does" option, and three "I hate everything Blizzard does" options of differing degrees, and you're not going to get an understandable opinion base out of a poll like that.
|
On September 25 2010 08:34 fabiano wrote:I wish Crossfire was in the ladder pool.... whas wrong with Blizzard, letting bad maps in the pool and leaving Peaks of Baekdo out??? Whats frightnening is that they are balancing the game based ONLY in small and bad maps. Edit: for those who dont know, I present you Peaks of Baekdo:
Playing zvt vs mech on that map is a nightmare.. The passages are so narrow that you're practically feeding your units to terran.
|
Peaks would be a lot better than the other maps but even that's pretty tight for a Brood War map. Not to mention it seems they narrowed a lot of the paths.
|
Yeah definitely, balancing the game around the awful Blizzard maps is going to kill the game at some point. I don't understand why they're the ones making all the maps, shouldn't users be able to suggest maps? Shouldn't there be a community voting system? Why does Blizzard assume they know how to make competitive maps?
|
What we probably want is a meeting in the middle. Some map stuff (destructible rocks, cliffs, occasional chokes, Xel'naga towers) should be reasonably balanced across the races so we can have varied maps. On the other hand we should be building maps that are within a good map size to allow for balance for all races. If that range is too narrow to allow for some variety in map size then that would need to be balanced out as well.
|
On September 25 2010 10:06 AssuredVacancy wrote:
Playing zvt vs mech on that map is a nightmare.. The passages are so narrow that you're practically feeding your units to terran.
Not really, Thats why zerg have mutas and broodlords.
OT. Yea need larger maps, small maps are so annoying 
|
On September 25 2010 10:06 AssuredVacancy wrote:
Playing zvt vs mech on that map is a nightmare.. The passages are so narrow that you're practically feeding your units to terran.
They aren't that narrow... plus there are many different routes to take through the map.
There was another thread on here where someone suggested changing the map pool up for different divisions. As someone moves up the divisions it would make sense if maps that Blizzard define as "more complicated" were added to the pool. And the more imbalanced ones were eliminated. I hope that as tournaments begin to use more "made for TV maps" Blizzard goes with the flow and adds them to the map pool.
PS. It seems to me that "more complicated" would mean more macro oriented maps, not just more paths across the map
|
I don't see why people assume that Blizzard will never allow community maps into the ladder pool.
I've seen posts saying that Blizzard thinks that they're too hard for the average gamer or whatever, but tbh it seems like more of the usual QQ casuals ruining everything bullshit. Has anyone got a source? Maybe if more people ask about it they'll make changes.
|
I have been thinking about this lately as well. Most of the maps are quite bad for Zerg. I would really like to see more maps with bigger ramps and natural expansions that are easier to defend.
|
Well that makes it pretty damn clear Blizzard. I know you're watching. Get on it!
|
i like how all blizzard ladder maps are small, excluding one which is medium. >.>
|
I can think of a zerg favored map, and if that's what we need to play on to make the game balanced, I find that rather depressing. Terrible as they are, I'd much rather the game be balanced on the current maps so that in the future when we do have more balanced maps, they can have more unique characteristics like cliffs.
|
So... many... single chokepoints.
Also, here's an issue, how the hell are huge macro maps suppose to work in SC2?
You need a fuckload of workers to saturate a base.. so are these epic games only going to end up with 50 food armies!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/2/2c/Crossfire.jpg/405px-Crossfire.jpg)
