They're letting the people vote on up to 2 maps each, to see which ones they'll be adding to the ladder. I hope some of the older, more tired maps get ousted. Like The shattered Temple, maybe Metalopolis as well.
I've seen tons of people ask for Daybreak to be on the ladder, and I suspect it'll finally be happening. I personally voted for Daybreak and Metropolis. And with Ohana's debut on the horizon as well, the future of the SC2 ladder looks rather bright!
and yes, I know there's a thread for this in general SC2. However, there are some folk, like me, who come here entirely for mapping, and we also care what goes on in our ladders. Check it out!
Voted Daybreak on Crevasse. I REALLY REALLY want an in base expo on ladder and see how it plays out with the average player. Though, I don't really like any of the other maps with the exception of terminus and I suppose Belshir. Belshir is fairly standard and has no main ramp. No me gusta 4gate vs 4gate >.>
Easily the best imo, Crevasse would be an amazing option too but its just not friendly to a lot of lower league players, it's still one of my favs though. I'd say these maps are the most "Mass friendly" maps from the choices we're given.
If only pros played ladder I would be voting Daybreak and Terminus
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
Signed,
prodiG Mapmaker & Commentator for ESV
I agree entirely, and that was something that had just occured to me. If they make changes to make an LE version, that base looks like it would be right in Blizzard's cross-hairs.
This looks like a real defining moment for the entire future of the ladder. Do they hold strong to their 8M2G bylaw, or do they set a precedent for future maps, of all sorts and shapes? Something similar would be the case if Crevasse were to make it, but Daybreak looks like the 1 shoo-in here.
Voted for Daybreak and Metropolis. And it looks like those are the two maps at the top of the poll. If they both get in, I think metalopolis will be swapped for Metropolis, not sure what they would swap Daybreak in with, maybe Tal'Darim? (Thats just the Protoss in me wanting less 4gates)
Metropolis is a bad map, and even morrow seems to agree as he says here. Maybe balance wise it's alright. Only complaints are late game zvt and I suppose even tvp would be hard considering there are only 2 chokes into your side of the map. The map in general however is just too boring. Nothing extraordinary about it. In fact, I think Shattered Temple is more interesting than that map...which is saying something >.>
On February 29 2012 14:26 Gl!tch wrote: Voted for Daybreak and Metropolis. And it looks like those are the two maps at the top of the poll. If they both get in, I think metalopolis will be swapped for Metropolis, not sure what they would swap Daybreak in with, maybe Tal'Darim? (Thats just the Protoss in me wanting less 4gates)
I agree that those two are the best GSL maps, but Tal'Darim should stay (I play Protoss too). Even though one matchup is pretty predictable, it's one of the most balanced maps in the game. The Playhem statistics showed almost exactly a 50% winrate for each matchup.
On February 29 2012 14:57 a176 wrote: SC2 going from 2-base play to free-3rd-NR20 gameplay
Misinformed? PvZ has never had a free third, and neither has TvZ. Show me one game where players took a free third without any form of aggression. Right now we're stuck in 2 base Protoss all-ins if you ask me!!
I agree with Timetwister. I voted for Daybreak and Crevasse as well.
Daybreak is a no-brainer.
Crevasse, I think would play out extremely well now a day. Beforehand it was Terran favored, but I feel with zergs getting better with scouting, infestors and their tier 3 tech as well as protoss being able to defend most 1 & 2 base play from Terran it'll put them in a great spot.
i voted for terminus and daybreak. i am gonna cry if belshir gets chosen. granted blizzard doesn't do the usual dustin browder lets add extra rocks for no F*CKING reason.
terminus will fill the void terrible space maps have left me with since scrap station and delta quadrant were removed. proxy stargates will be a possiblilty again. that and its a nice macro map. even though i know people will still do some kind of all in over 50% of the time on ladder -_-'
would love one of the more macro maps in and not living in rock land and changning the bases though.
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
Signed,
prodiG Mapmaker & Commentator for ESV
flat out disagree
current daybreak is like metalopolis: it has a 3rd with a massive opening AND 2 pathways, one of which you must choose to go through. it creates unnecessary strain on the defender and like you said promotes base trades instead of real action. i don't think many people pay to play/watch base trades instead of army trades.
if you look at fighting spirit, destination, tau cross, blah blah, the 3rds with gas always have a defenders advantage in a small choke, uphill ramp, or the ability to defend both the 2nd and 3rd simultaneously.
the games may tend to become a NR 20 because the 4th is also not contested on the potential daybreak LE. what blizzard tends to do by changing the 4th will slow the game down somewhat on the ladder, which I think is still preferable to encouraging base trade scenarios.
what i would do is to the remove the current third and its accompanying ramp into the natural, and restore the current "4th" to a full 3rd. then it will promote aggression.
like this...
of course then it might seem a bit small and with only 10 bases, it'd be the smallest map. may have to put some extra distance in the middle.
On February 29 2012 14:57 a176 wrote: SC2 going from 2-base play to free-3rd-NR20 gameplay
hahaha
Anyway, I'd like Daybreak and Calm Before the Storm. Calm won't win because pvt is prob massively toss favoured. I'm ambivalent about Metropolis. It seems alright, but just the fact that it reminds me slag pits brings back the psychological trauma of that god awful map.
I actually want to see Nerazim Crypt back. I really couldn't find a single flaw in that map. The chokes were fairly wide so forcefields were a little less powerful, but the map was on the big side, the 3rd was accessible but not free, there was no gold, rocks were only used tastefully, you could easily wall off your nat for ffe (a feature I'm finding woefully lacking these days... being able to wall off with only 3 buildings is kind of a huge deal to toss players in pvz, makes you have to worry about early pools so much less), rush distances that weren't crazy long or crazy short. It was just an overall solid map.
My vote goes to Daybreak & Terminus, I get to choose two maps, so I based my decision on what I think is the best 2 players and 4 players map in the map choice Blizzard had given me.
Best 2 players map: Daybreak ♦I think it has the best 2 players map layout compared to other 2 players map in the poll ♦I seen a lot of good games on this map in GSL - a good variety of cheese and macro games ♦Visually, it looks very beautiful ♦The tileset is not distracting to the eyes when I play multiple games on it ♦Daybreak > Bel'shir Winter > Dual Sight
Best 4 players map: Terminus ♦I think it has the best 4 players map layout compared to other 4 players map in the poll ♦I like the tileset of the map ♦Good old Terminus ♦Terminus > Crevasse / Metropolis > Calm Before the Storm
*I personally don't like 2 players map, I think the only good ones are Daybreak and Cloud Kingdom.
Volcano tileset I wish they will stop using the dark volcanic tileset like the one they used in Dual Sight (right half), its so dark you can barely see anything clearly, plus it hurts my eyes when I watch or play many games a map that has that tileset.
Shady - you mad ? The third's very defensible as of now. Massive opening ? I don't think so. But then, maybe you were mistaken and are talking about the nat. Which can be walled with 3 3x3 buildings and à depot or zealot, quite standard.
The map's fine as it is. Are you something like Dustin Browder's evil twin ? :D
I liked Nerazim too - the tower setup was just a little ridiculous, but it's a shame that Antiga is played in tournaments and Nerazim was scrapped.
I voted for Daybreak and Calm Before The Storm, because it was cool to pla on :D
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
Signed,
prodiG Mapmaker & Commentator for ESV
flat out disagree
current daybreak is like metalopolis: it has a 3rd with a massive opening AND 2 pathways, one of which you must choose to go through. it creates unnecessary strain on the defender and like you said promotes base trades instead of real action. i don't think many people pay to play/watch base trades instead of army trades.
if you look at fighting spirit, destination, tau cross, blah blah, the 3rds with gas always have a defenders advantage in a small choke, uphill ramp, or the ability to defend both the 2nd and 3rd simultaneously.
the games may tend to become a NR 20 because the 4th is also not contested on the potential daybreak LE. what blizzard tends to do by changing the 4th will slow the game down somewhat on the ladder, which I think is still preferable to encouraging base trade scenarios.
what i would do is to the remove the current third and its accompanying ramp into the natural, and restore the current "4th" to a full 3rd. then it will promote aggression.
like this...
of course then it might seem a bit small and with only 10 bases, it'd be the smallest map. may have to put some extra distance in the middle.
I don't think I've ever seen a base trade on daybreak. Can you point one out?
The third that you removed is fine, leave it as it is. You could take the third at the front and achieve that same defenders advantage, where defending the third would also defend the nat. Then the base you cut could be more like a free fourth. I think that's the best way to expand, and the zergs that rush to taking the third in the back should do so knowing that it's actually harder to defend than the one in the front with less minerals.
There's already a thread in the sc2 general forum but well. The thing I'm wondering is if they include the 2 GSL maps, does it mean they won't include Ohana ? Or if they include 3 maps how many new ones will be removed ? I think Shattered Temple will leave but it may mean Khoral Compound leaves too because it may become redundant with Daybreak.
Blizzard picking GSL maps is a bit demagogic. Of course it's the right way to include maps that pros play so everyone experience what they experience, but imo it's just another popularity contest and it'll be harder for community maps to get in. People watch the GSL so maps are popular so they include them. Teamliquid makes a map contest, winning maps get popular so let's include these maps. Haven's Lagoon got really popular and if it got in the top 3 of the TL contest it would probably have been included too. They even said they may make an other map contest in the future, but there's already a map contest every month so it just shows they just want maps to get popular, not necessarily good maps.
I also agree with a176, "SC2 going from 2-base play to free-3rd-NR20 gameplay" and discussions in the custom maps forum hinted about this trend. I remember I complained about the first 3 bases layout being the same in all custom maps and people including Superouman said the purpose was to prevent 2 base pushes and that the layout was the only way not to have agression before the 3rd map is taken. And in most motm threads judges explained how better it was to have solid macro maps that forced to attack when people got a 200/200 army, that it was better to have huge fights. So yeah that's definetly where we're heading. Personally as a spectator I want to watch agression all game long not players selecting larvas for 20 minutes.
PS meta : just type daybreak base trade in google if you want, apparently this week end at MLG Ret vs Mvp map 3 was one.
I don't get it, why do they put in maps that are scrapped by GSL for a long time? That doesn't make any sense. Now we might get Bel'Shir Beach, another auto downvote for Protoss players. -_-
Everybody please vote for Bel'Shir and Daybreak. They are the maps that are used the most in foreign tournaments as well, we'd benefit more from Bel'Shir than Metropolis! Gogo!! )
Ugh. All those maps are absolutely terrible. I'm not looking forward to this being implemented, my downvotes are already filled to the point where if one map+matchup shows up I just cheese because the alternative is even more stupid.
Bel'Shir Winter is the worst of all. It's like the map maker thought, "I know, for my next trick I'll figure out a way to make Tal'Dariim even worse!"
On February 29 2012 22:51 Bumblebee wrote: Everybody please vote for Bel'Shir and Daybreak. They are the maps that are used the most in foreign tournaments as well, we'd benefit more from Bel'Shir than Metropolis! Gogo!! )
Why not encourage the tournaments to switch to Metropolis for obvious reasons?
Maybe if we vote for Bel'Shir Blizzard will actually try to fix the flat choke.. like.. changing the whole warpgate thing in HotS pls :<
Maybe they will just make the main one level higher instead tho, how it always should have been, cause PvP is broken on flat chokes (on Tal'Darim as well).
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
Signed,
prodiG Mapmaker & Commentator for ESV
I'd just like to point out that the images of the maps on Blizzard's page might be already edited versions, and Daybreak still has a 6m1g show on it. I say this because the image of Dual Sight shows standard XN watchtower graphics, and not the tiny red/blue warpgates we're used to. I'm trying to remember the last game on Dual Sight I watched, but has it changed? Does it still have the (strange) towers? If so, Daybreak is probably already safe. If not, sorry, disregard this post.
Edit: wait, wait, there's no gold on that Dual Sight. Aren't the far corners gold bases? When did Dual Sight get changed?
On March 01 2012 01:33 Affluenza wrote: what is NR20?
Stands for "no rush 20 minutes"... an old standby for people (like myself) who were terrible at BW and just wanted to make kewl spaceships and go pewpew with a 200/200 army.
I'm surprised Bel'Shir is getting so much support, honestly. In its current form it's, let's say, less than perfect. However, I strayed upon Crux's site once and spotted a Tal'Darim Altar SE, which has a raised main with a proper ramp, so maybe they can do something similar for Beach, if it makes it. If a change like that were to be implemented, I'd be all for it.
On March 01 2012 01:42 Iranon wrote: Edit: wait, wait, there's no gold on that Dual Sight. Aren't the far corners gold bases? When did Dual Sight get changed?
They got rid of golds on Dual Sight (and all maps) either this GSL season or last, don't remember which. Take your choice of gold minerals are retarded (still legit reasoning) or terrans could mule the crap out of it and get a better benefit than the other two races (no longer viable).
Anyway, I'm voting for Daybreak definitively, haven't decided on my second yet. All I know is it won't be Bel'shir.
If they did Xel'naga Fortress, I wonder if the watchtower would explode after a certain time like the actual GSL map...
There's already a thread in the sc2 general forum but well. The thing I'm wondering is if they include the 2 GSL maps, does it mean they won't include Ohana ? Or if they include 3 maps how many new ones will be removed ? I think Shattered Temple will leave but it may mean Khoral Compound leaves too because it may become redundant with Daybreak
Ohana is still going into ladder S7 (if it's not, we haven't heard anything about it). Blizzard has yet to announce what maps they will be removing but my guess is it will probably start with the oldest maps: Metal, Shattered and Shakuras.
well i think it may also depend on the result of the poll. i don't see metal staying if they add metropolis for example.
anyway, i think daybreak is the most logical choice, altho you have to expect them to remove the half base. all the other maps aren't totally great imho. bel shir winter might be the second logical choice, but i voted for crevasse anyway because it has a much more original layout and playstyle
I don't think I've ever seen a base trade on daybreak. Can you point one out?
The third that you removed is fine, leave it as it is. You could take the third at the front and achieve that same defenders advantage, where defending the third would also defend the nat. Then the base you cut could be more like a free fourth. I think that's the best way to expand, and the zergs that rush to taking the third in the back should do so knowing that it's actually harder to defend than the one in the front with less minerals.
GSL Code A, Round3, Day2, Match1, oGsSuperNova vs. SlayersRyung watchable here:http://www.gomtv.net/2012gsls1/vod/66882
So Daybreak is getting in... That's great. But I have one question:
In the TL Map Contest, Blizzard specifically indicated to the contest organizer that the bases should each have 8 mineral fields and 2 gas to avoid confusion for players at the lower levels. Some of you may remember the small controversy around the change from GSL Tal'Darim Altar which had its third at 6m1g. When it was added to ladder, it became Tal'Darim Altar LE and saw the third changed to 8m2g with the addition of destructible rocks. This was a pretty significant change, one that the map's creator LSPrime had not intended in it's original design (and one that if memory serves, he was pretty chapped about).
If Blizzard continues to follow the protocol that they have in the past, all non-standard resource bases will be changed to 8m 2g. It's pretty fair to say that Daybreak is one of the most exciting and brilliant 2p map designs we've seen yet in competitive SC2, but changing the forward expansion to 8m2g has some pretty significant effects. Now players can start taking that expansion as their 4th, positioning their armies in such a way that makes it very easy to defend everything (centered around the Xel'Naga Tower nearby).
Daybreak isn't an awesome map because of how defensive it is. It's awesome because of how much action it creates. The basetrades that occur because of the rush distance and the rocks in the middle path forcing players to cross the map in opposite directions often missing one another's army entirely. The strategic placement of armies and map control around the high ground pods & expansions at the 12 and 6. The action packed game that when doesn't end in a 2-base timing attack usually leads to an all-out war of attrition as players whittle each other down. All to that last forward base with 6 minerals and one gas.
Please Blizzard. Please don't fix what's not broken. When you add Daybreak, don't change the expansion <3
Signed,
prodiG Mapmaker & Commentator for ESV
flat out disagree
current daybreak is like metalopolis: it has a 3rd with a massive opening AND 2 pathways, one of which you must choose to go through. it creates unnecessary strain on the defender and like you said promotes base trades instead of real action. i don't think many people pay to play/watch base trades instead of army trades.
if you look at fighting spirit, destination, tau cross, blah blah, the 3rds with gas always have a defenders advantage in a small choke, uphill ramp, or the ability to defend both the 2nd and 3rd simultaneously.
the games may tend to become a NR 20 because the 4th is also not contested on the potential daybreak LE. what blizzard tends to do by changing the 4th will slow the game down somewhat on the ladder, which I think is still preferable to encouraging base trade scenarios.
what i would do is to the remove the current third and its accompanying ramp into the natural, and restore the current "4th" to a full 3rd. then it will promote aggression.
like this...
of course then it might seem a bit small and with only 10 bases, it'd be the smallest map. may have to put some extra distance in the middle.
Errr, no offense, but that change would be absolutely dreadful as taking a third would be absolutely impossible and comparative to taking the gold on xel'naga caverns, and a fourth would extend you across the whole map and make you positioned really badly.
On February 29 2012 18:48 Ampster wrote: My vote goes to Daybreak & Terminus, I get to choose two maps, so I based my decision on what I think is the best 2 players and 4 players map in the map choice Blizzard had given me.
Best 2 players map: Daybreak ♦I think it has the best 2 players map layout compared to other 2 players map in the poll ♦I seen a lot of good games on this map in GSL - a good variety of cheese and macro games ♦Visually, it looks very beautiful ♦The tileset is not distracting to the eyes when I play multiple games on it ♦Daybreak > Bel'shir Winter > Dual Sight
Best 4 players map: Terminus ♦I think it has the best 2 players map layout compared to other 4 players map in the poll ♦I like the tileset of the map ♦Good old Terminus ♦Terminus > Crevasse / Metropolis > Calm Before the Storm
*I personally don't like 2 players map, I think the only good ones are Daybreak and Cloud Kingdom.
Volcano tileset I wish they will stop using the dark volcanic tileset like the one they used in Dual Sight (right half), its so dark you can barely see anything clearly, plus it hurts my eyes when I watch or play many games a map that has that tileset.
Kudos for picking the two best maps. Btw I don't get peoples complaints about the darker tile set maps. I have never had a issue with them. I have a LED monitor not that that would make difference
On February 29 2012 18:48 Ampster wrote: My vote goes to Daybreak & Terminus, I get to choose two maps, so I based my decision on what I think is the best 2 players and 4 players map in the map choice Blizzard had given me.
Best 2 players map: Daybreak ♦I think it has the best 2 players map layout compared to other 2 players map in the poll ♦I seen a lot of good games on this map in GSL - a good variety of cheese and macro games ♦Visually, it looks very beautiful ♦The tileset is not distracting to the eyes when I play multiple games on it ♦Daybreak > Bel'shir Winter > Dual Sight
Best 4 players map: Terminus ♦I think it has the best 2 players map layout compared to other 4 players map in the poll ♦I like the tileset of the map ♦Good old Terminus ♦Terminus > Crevasse / Metropolis > Calm Before the Storm
*I personally don't like 2 players map, I think the only good ones are Daybreak and Cloud Kingdom.
Volcano tileset I wish they will stop using the dark volcanic tileset like the one they used in Dual Sight (right half), its so dark you can barely see anything clearly, plus it hurts my eyes when I watch or play many games a map that has that tileset.
Kudos for picking the two best maps. Btw I don't get peoples complaints about the darker tile set maps. I have never had a issue with them. I have a LED monitor not that that would make difference
@darker tile set maps: I guess, its just me then. The volcanic tile set is the only tile set I dislike though, other darker tile sets look fine. Spectator wise, Zerg and Terran units/buildings are a bit harder to see on that tile set; the cliffs are less noticeable which makes it the elevation differences less noticeable, but mostly importantly the strong contrast between the glowing lava and the terrain. Player wise, it doesn't look that distracting when I play it on low setting.
@Blizzard's Bel'shir Winter: I noticed a comment from the other thread about Blizzard getting rid of the snow in Bel'shir Winter. At first, I didn't understand what that comment is trying to say outright because I noticed no differences between Blizzard's Bel'shir Winter and the original; my initial thought when I first looked at Bel'shir Winter map preview in Blizzard's site is "Mmm, Bel'shir Winter looks a bit uglier than it used to look.." I decided to look up GSL Bel'shir Winter on wiki.teamliquid.net and understand exactly "the snow" that is gone missing in Blizzard's Bel'shir Winter. Somehow in someway, Blizzard manages to make this map from a visually one of the most beautiful GSL maps to the most ugly looking map among all the map choice they provided. ♦So the map preview we're seeing = Blizzard's final cut?
On March 01 2012 06:31 a176 wrote: Also could someone explain to me whats so good about metropolis?
3rd isn't cockblocked by rocks, compared to maps like tal'darim or terminus But 3rd isn't TOO easily defendable like calm before the storm. And it doesn't have major spawn imbalances like crevasse.
O_____O metropolis' third is actually extremely defensible. So is the fourth and the fifth actually, because you just need to control two not-very-wide ramps and you have your side of the map. Enjoy your turtle son.
It's a lot more exposed than calm before the storm. If it was that easy to defend then how do zergs die to 2-base timings against protoss on metropolis but rarely on cbts?
It may still be a little too turtley, but afaik it has better balance compared to most of the other maps in the poll, except daybreak and maybe dual sight (not sure about xelnaga caverns, don't really see that map used) in terms of balance.
I don't think it's relevant to compare cbts and Metro. First, cbts is about midgame 3base turtle, and Metro midlate 5base. Then, it's very easy to say Jungle Basin is a macro map, if you compare it to Steppes of War.
Same thing stands for balance : ok it might be more balanced than Terminus....... But then it's easy to be more balanced than Terminus. And balance doesn't warrant interesting games anyway, as long as it's under 55/45 it's fine, better make the map fun to play instead.
Zerg die to 2-base timings ? But then is zerg 3base turtle really efficient ? Don't think so. However, if you want to engage toss army to contest their side of the map, you're warranted to get slaughtered on that choke. It's like Shakuras, but more narrow with less pathways - and everyone complains about Shakuras split map scenarios.
On March 01 2012 19:44 ArcticRaven wrote: Seriously ? O__________________________________O why blizzard why ?
LS Prime's gonna be pretty pissed to see both his ladder maps dismantled that way. Why Blizzard why ?
I think it's because it doesn't have any rocks in it... >.> I don't think he has to worry though, because Metropolis is still edging over it. So at least 1 of his maps should stay the same.
I opted for Dual Sight and Calm Before the Storm. Not only is Dual Sight a very old map compared to a lot of the others, but it also has the potential to allow for more interesting games. Calm Before the Storm may not be to everyone's liking, although it surely is a great map. It was hard for me to decide which maps I like the most as all of them have their pros and cons. I just think that these two maps would be a fresh addition to the ladder. Daybreak seems to be winning so far, and that in itself is quite a good thing. I personally would love to play on Daybreak on the ladder.
On March 01 2012 20:20 ArcticRaven wrote: O_____O metropolis' third is actually extremely defensible. So is the fourth and the fifth actually, because you just need to control two not-very-wide ramps and you have your side of the map. Enjoy your turtle son.
No one to correct me ? Daybreak is by winpark, not LS