PTR for 1.3.5 now available - Page 26
Forum Index > SC2 General |
EZSkull
United States230 Posts
| ||
Verator
United States283 Posts
http://imgur.com/a/RA8xR | ||
Handfoot
United States62 Posts
"SC2 Public Test server is not available right now. Please check http://www.battle.net/sc2/game/ptr/ for more information." Yet the PTR is up. | ||
TENTHST
United States204 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: I don't understand the disconnect between two things at the moment: -The dev team is doing amazingly well with listening to pro & community feedback in order to make fantastic balance changes. -The dev team is continuing to add maps which are poorly designed and do not take into account pro & community feedback. It seriously makes me scratch my head. Take a lesson from the map pools of major pro tournaments such as GSL & MLG and start making changes to the map pool that actually make sense. If blizzard wants this game to develop depth while being balanced and encouraging competition, they need to start paying more attention to the map pools. Maps like tal-darim altar, crevasse, terminus RE, Iccup testbug etc. are the future of SC2 maps. On a daily basis we see pro level players showcase a plethora of complex strategies which are extremely enjoyable to watch on these larger, well-designed maps. Maps like slag pits, delta quadrant, and 3/4 of the new test maps encourage all-in rush strategies as well specific abuses with tanks & bunker rushes generally in tvz which blizzard has worked to remove in the past (see changes to LT, shakuras, and how many of the smaller maps were turfed). I can't help but shake my head that the same mistakes being made over and over in map design. It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map. Tanks on a 3rd in test4 shooting into zerg main. http://i.imgur.com/scXuQ.jpg Extremely short distance to a nearly un-stoppable bunker position (Can't get at the scv to stop it from building on 3/4 sides). Test2. http://i.imgur.com/GJ9Oy.jpg Tank shooting into natural on Test2 http://i.imgur.com/e35Pc.jpg Tanks shooting half way into the zerg main from below the cliff on Test1 http://i.imgur.com/StVg9.jpg Wr3k for president! seriously though, blizzard removes maps like steppes because of rush distance....and then not only doesnt remove close spawns on metalopolis/shattered temple/slag pits/delta quadrant/backwater gultch, but then introduces maps for the upcoming season with those glaring positional imbalances as well as several others??? WTF?!?!?!!?!? i would really love to sit in on a blizzard balance meeting and hear their rationalizations for these issues even after the vast majority of the community is in disagreement with their decisions. | ||
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:33 Handfoot wrote: Anyone know what this means? "SC2 Public Test server is not available right now. Please check http://www.battle.net/sc2/game/ptr/ for more information." Yet the PTR is up. which server are you accessing it from (the shortcut you prob use is like pointing to which...folder...?) you need to use the NA one. | ||
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map. That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of. | ||
WinteRR
Australia201 Posts
Edit: and Yeah what the above post said is completely correct, without these small nuances terran are already pretty stretched as it is. | ||
Handfoot
United States62 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:34 zhurai wrote: which server are you accessing it from (the shortcut you prob use is like pointing to which...folder...?) you need to use the NA one. I am using the NA one. | ||
Verator
United States283 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:36 DooMDash wrote: That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of. Uhhhh, last I checked terran in every major tournament does fairly okay in straight up macro battles and didn't need cheesy or abusive map tactics to win. GSL particularly. | ||
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
| ||
TwentyOneJN
United States56 Posts
| ||
Charon1979
Austria317 Posts
The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of. so after losing my natural due to an "unsoppable" bunker rush, I can take advantage of being contained one base? | ||
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:45 DarkKiwi wrote: Uhhhh, last I checked terran in every major tournament does fairly okay in straight up macro battles and didn't need cheesy or abusive map tactics to win. GSL particularly. I see Terrans abusing positions a lot, but the whole point of the matter is if all these abusable spots were that good the pros would be using them more. This means just because maps have abuseable spots does not make them broken, if they were broken we'd see the pros use them every game. Why don't they? Because the pros they are playing against actually prepare or know how to deal with the abuses, so the Terran pro cannot always rely on these. So basically what I am saying is most people who will actually let these do damage to them repeatedly are not pro level for a reason. | ||
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On July 14 2011 10:20 bowyert wrote: all joking aside does anyone think it would actually be viable to forge fe vs zerg on that map? it seems like if he just goes for a straight up roach bust you'd have to build a lot of cannons Honestly its pretty rare now that you wouldnt have to build alot of cannons anyways. The Chinese version of the forge FE features 4 cannons at the natural on most maps and it doesnt really put you behind at all or make you unsafe if theyre well positioned. Taking their style I can safely forge FE on xel naga caverns already. I think the destructibles would give you enough time to make more wall or warp in more cannons, etc. | ||
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
| ||
Jayrod
1820 Posts
Why would seige tanks right there even really matter and if hes got tanks there why dont you have any vision of the left of your base so he cant do that drop? Not so sure the map's to blame for those scenarios and honestly if a terran seiges up that far away from everything with the second exit on the base he be flanked. If he doesnt | ||
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:36 DooMDash wrote: That's more or less catering to Terrans strengths. If Blizzard designed every map with out any advantageous positions or abuses Terrans would probably do pretty poorly since they are not meant to win in straight up macro battles. The maps are good because Terran can play to its strengths and abuses, yet they are still great macro maps with plenty of spots for Zergs to take advantage of. MULE would like to have a word with you. | ||
DroneAllDay
United States140 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:55 Jayrod wrote: Why would seige tanks right there even really matter and if hes got tanks there why dont you have any vision of the left of your base so he cant do that drop? Not so sure the map's to blame for those scenarios and honestly if a terran seiges up that far away from everything with the second exit on the base he be flanked. If he doesnt Well those tanks can hit the main and allow marines to be dropped in, and as for vision of that base, well if the Terran isn't allowed to seige tanks at his own third (where by the way, they can hit your main...) and so becuase of how a Terran can push through that he can kill your main pretty easily and then gets a high ground advantage killing your nat, where ALL of your tech will be as well, basically making it GG right there. Making in conclusion, that if Terran ever gets a third in those positions (which any competent T can) the Zerg will instantly lose. | ||
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
Inject/CB would like to have a word with you first. | ||
Rizell
Sweden237 Posts
On July 14 2011 15:24 Wr3k wrote: I don't understand the disconnect between two things at the moment: -The dev team is doing amazingly well with listening to pro & community feedback in order to make fantastic balance changes. -The dev team is continuing to add maps which are poorly designed and do not take into account pro & community feedback. It seriously makes me scratch my head. Take a lesson from the map pools of major pro tournaments such as GSL & MLG and start making changes to the map pool that actually make sense. If blizzard wants this game to develop depth while being balanced and encouraging competition, they need to start paying more attention to the map pools. Maps like tal-darim altar, crevasse, terminus RE, Iccup testbug etc. are the future of SC2 maps. On a daily basis we see pro level players showcase a plethora of complex strategies which are extremely enjoyable to watch on these larger, well-designed maps. Maps like slag pits, delta quadrant, and 3/4 of the new test maps encourage all-in rush strategies as well specific abuses with tanks & bunker rushes generally in tvz which blizzard has worked to remove in the past (see changes to LT, shakuras, and how many of the smaller maps were turfed). I can't help but shake my head that the same mistakes being made over and over in map design. It's almost as if the goal here is to replace solid macro style tvz with cheese tailored to specific abusable characteristics on each map. Tanks on a 3rd in test4 shooting into zerg main. http://i.imgur.com/scXuQ.jpg Extremely short distance to a nearly un-stoppable bunker position (Can't get at the scv to stop it from building on 3/4 sides). Test2. http://i.imgur.com/GJ9Oy.jpg Tank shooting into natural on Test2 http://i.imgur.com/e35Pc.jpg Tanks shooting half way into the zerg main from below the cliff on Test1 http://i.imgur.com/StVg9.jpg just wanted to quote this... because its both true and sad at the same time. Give me more vetos or fix this shit please Blizzard. | ||
| ||