|
So like everyone else I have been considering the overall balance of the game and I think that sc2 is pretty damn close to perfectly balanced. I have heard from a lot of people that the maps are what is really causing the last bit of imbalance and I would agree. Each map plays very differently and I do appreciate this experimental stage of sc2. This leads to the questions, what do we want to see in the future.
Specifically in this post I want to hear people's opinions of back doors to bases in maps. Blistering Sands is the most obvious but there are several others. Blistering Sands, Jungle Basin, Shakuras Plateau, and Kulas Ravine (not in ladder rotation anymore) all have a back door to the main and several maps have a secondary entrance to the natural.
It seems that these maps all lend to 1 base play and all-in play (not always the same thing) which has been complained about a lot.
I personally do well with all ins and I feel some maps and matchups almost require it. I would like to see a little more variety in the games such as in the GSL. Ideally I want all in and 1 base play to be viable but not the dominant strategy i certain situations.
So my question is do you feel that maps with back doors should be rotated out of the ladder pool and relegated to history as a failed experiment or do you think we should see more of these maps so we can get shorter games with more action?
|
I think they are good because it is hard to contain plus you can just thumbs them down
|
It is definitely a good dynamic. I am glad that some maps have them and others do not becaue it can force changing play style quite a bit.
|
In regards to thumbing them down I don't care myself to not play them. In fact my main is usually Terran and 1 base all in strategies work really well. I am more concerned about keeping the game fair and making sure the pro level is not dominated by 1 strategy.
|
IMO, good for zerg players, bad for everyone else. Why? Zerg units are really fast, and once you take down that wall you can harass either side before the defender has time to get there.
|
People really complain about backdoors because its just another aspect of the game they don't have the ability to keep up with; that is, they'd all prefer the map layouts to be incredibly safe for the first 10 minutes of the game.
Anyways, seperate entrances into bases have been around since bw ... *cough*
|
I make my backdoor my front.
As T, I always at least put up one PF at the choke point of the front door, thus securing my nat as well. Esp effective on Blistering Sands.
|
personally, i like the variety.
|
On December 06 2010 15:54 a176 wrote:People really complain about backdoors because its just another aspect of the game they don't have the ability to keep up with; that is, they'd all prefer the map layouts to be incredibly safe for the first 10 minutes of the game. Anyways, seperate entrances into bases have been around since bw ... *cough* There's a huge difference between rocks than can be destroyed by a medium size army in 20-30 seconds and stacked minerals.
|
As much as they piss me off, I think they are okay balance wise. It diversifies the map pool and allows more aggressive strategies to be more viable.
Terran players are normally allowed to tech up incredibly quickly by hiding behind their walls, but backdoor rocks force them to build a solid army as well.
Contrarily, Zerg players, who are normally forced to expand early due to their weak busting units early game, are allowed to play more aggressively. If they can bust down those backdoor rocks, they can effectively push earlier against either Terran or Protoss due to the fact that they aren't fighting up a puny ramp.
I think that while these maps are hated by everyone (especially lower leagues where everyone all-ins), they ultimately diversify the game, allowing players to show off their creativity.
|
I think it is only fine if with the backrocks destroyed, the defender still has shorter distance between both entrances compared to the attacker. More like Jungle Basin less like Blistering Sands.
Not saying Jungle Basin is a good map, both are awful maps imo but the problem with Jungle Basin is not in the rocks but the 3rd base while Blistering are bad 90 percent because of the backdoor.
|
Hmmmm, I'd never considered the mineral stack back-door. I suppose that mineral-blocked back doors and destructible terrain back-doors are actually pretty different, as only the defender can reasonably knock down the mineral-blocked kind. Any thought to back door entrances that require a detector to kill? Something with enough health to require 2-3 scans so terran doesn't have a big advantage maybe?
In general, I like the concept of destructible back-doors. I've heard that people don't like Blistering Sands due to the combination of the back-door rocks, the difference between the distance for the attacker and defender (much smaller for attacker) and the difficulty in securing a third base.
|
On December 06 2010 16:08 sixghost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 15:54 a176 wrote:People really complain about backdoors because its just another aspect of the game they don't have the ability to keep up with; that is, they'd all prefer the map layouts to be incredibly safe for the first 10 minutes of the game. Anyways, seperate entrances into bases have been around since bw ... *cough* There's a huge difference between rocks than can be destroyed by a medium size army in 20-30 seconds and stacked minerals.
sadly this is only one of the examples from brood war.. how about the nice map with stacked temples that siege tanks could munch through pretty damn fast.. then gain a high ground advantage against your main?
|
On December 06 2010 15:54 a176 wrote:People really complain about backdoors because its just another aspect of the game they don't have the ability to keep up with; that is, they'd all prefer the map layouts to be incredibly safe for the first 10 minutes of the game. Anyways, seperate entrances into bases have been around since bw ... *cough* The difference is the defender has the advantage on destination, but on blistering sands the attacker has the shorter route to each door. There is a big difference. I am fine just give the defender a break and let him have the shorter distance.
|
I believe rocks on maps such as blistering are really bad, because ranged units like roaches, marauders can smash them and you will have to go all the way around to start fending them off, and if you're on top of the rocks, even on the high ground you can't even do anything.
|
I think so far I've enjoyed the variety that these back doors provide. Often times they do make matches a bit more... interesting to say the least, but I just think it adds to the game a lot. I think with the system of being able to thumbs down maps it makes it fairly balanced, thus if you don't feel like playing on those maps with back door rocks you generally can avoid all of them on ladder.
I think one of the big things that it makes players do though is play the map, and not their own personal play style every match, which is nice to see some changes in match ups every so often. Now if majority of the maps started having back entrances then it would be a bit tougher to deal with constantly having to worry about just being all-in'd every game.
As for tourny's, a lot do have the thumbs down implemented so you don't just play these maps with back entrances. But again as I said adds that extra bit of variety.
|
yeah i agree with most of the people on this thread when they say backdoors are good when the defender still has the advantage. For example, on blistering sands, the zerg can get into the base of the terran every time because they are so much more mobile. The terran can try and cover both but thats probably even worse because the zerg can come in from so many angles. However, a backdoor like jungle basin is great because it is an extra way for the attacker to gain an advantage if the defender is not prepared, such as in GSL2 when TLO didnt make a supply depot and was flanked.
|
@a176
they should make spawning pool require an overlord
just noticed your quote, good thing you start with an overlord
on topic, i'm not even sure why i'm posting here, it seems kind of dumb to discuss these things. What can I say, back doors are good? Back doors aren't good? It depends on who utilizes them. Obviously back doors are great for zerg if they can bust them down first, but back doors are great for terran if they can bust them down first and also good for protoss if they can bust them down first. I've had lots of success dealing with terran on this map because I was able to break their rocks, but I've also had lots of losses because they broke mine down first. Just depends.
Also there really isn't much in the map pool that is good these days except the ones already in the pool. Just check the map pool on b.net all of the 1v1 2 person and 4 person maps that aren't used in ladder are absolutely awful. So as far as removing maps with back doors? Blistering is definitely one of the best maps there is, I'm really liking shakuras but I hate jungle basin. However, I can't think of a single map that could replace jungle except kulas ravine because all the other blizzard maps are just THAT bad.
Blizz should consider the custom map making community for ladder maps because there are some good ones, and I don't mean ICCUP maps that are gigantic in size because someone is trying to copy BW 100% (thinking of match point here). We don't need BW clones, we need remakes with tweaks to size and position or good ladder maps that are good because they play well.
|
I think most of them are terrible, and do not add to "style" or anything good in games.
Backdoors need to: - have tons of hp or be stacked like in bw - alternatively be minerals, meaning the defender will keep the wall if you can't keep your offensive mining workers alive. - be a much longer path to your enemies base than the normal route. - make the map better, not just be a feature on a checklist
|
Ultimately the best answer is: It depends.
For example, many people hate the Blistering Sand backdoor but like the Jungle Basin backdoor because its easier for the defender, as it should be. People liking the maps themselves, though, is a different story, but it's at least pretty clear what the majority favor/disfavor on the FEATURES of the maps.
|
|
|
|