what about money maps?

Re: fastest maps

well one thing i would like to see is a fastest, but with diefferent terrain, so the map is not just this borign set of boxes... i think blizzard is gonna make the official version though, because they are very popular. O and same with Zero Clutter.

 

Re: fastest maps

im so with u..... mabey 1 tree or 1 mountain lol

and deffinitly an official version i think fastest maps are fun to play every once in a while, breaks up the repedity of low money maps

 

Re: fastest maps

fastest maps are the best. The rapid pace makes the game just that much more fun to play. The feeling of continually being rushed makes my game play become more focused on strategy rather than mass forces.

 

Re: fastest maps

This thread is making me sick. Money maps exist to filter out all strategy from the game, boiling out all of the fun so all you have left is a bunch of clicking queues.

I am hoping that the features like structure queues and multi-building selection will make money maps less interesting.... that way, maybe fewer people will play them, and I can have more people to play with on the real maps. Well, it hasn't happened in any game, ever, but I can hope....

*Note, merged with older thread of same topic.

 

Whats wrong with money maps? I say they are much more fun then regular maps. Everyone has larger armies, so the battles are more epic and much more entertaining to watch and the replays are fun to watch, I watch them multiple times before they get boreing.

 

Money maps take out the whole aspect of the game related to land and resource control, using the terrain, hiding information from the enemy, and in most games, all early-game strategy involving first-tier units. It just boils down to dull, homogeneous armies beating against other dull, homogeneous armies until someone's dead.

 

sounds like war

 

so no 1st tier units are used, so? I rarely use first tier in regular maps except for base defence anyway. I go for goliaths and tanks when I'm terran and use marines only for defence in bunkers.

I agree with drie, using large armies of the same unit to beat the crap out of others does sound a lot like war. And on mineral maps, people usially tend to build different units, tank and goliath for terran, hydralisk and lurkers for zerg, and dragoons and carriers for protoss.

 

The game is made for all units to be used in different situations, supporting one another in order to maximize the effectiveness of the group. On money maps, all of this subtlety is washed out by the fact that everything is played so close to the unit cap, in wide open environments, with no mineral limitations to speak of. Most actions are spent giving orders to structures to build more cannon fodder, the rest are spent briefly ordering large groups to their deaths before returning to the management of the build queue.

With the more streamlined interface of StarCraft II, you'll find out, very quickly, that any "fast-paced action" on money maps in the original game has been torn away. It will be boring to simply select your 20 gateways and press the hotkeys for your favorite unit 5 times, then wait for them to build before selecting the lot of them with one drag, and ordering them to kill themselves. What was several hundred keypresses before, will be somewhere around... 8. Will the uncountable keystrokes saved by the interface be used to improve players' games tactically? Well, in some cases, probably, but there is only so much micro you can do when you're maxed out on exactly two types of units.

 

Mineral map are the fun ones to play. Large armies fighting to thier doom are much more fun to watch than a few marine and medics with tanks rolling into an enemy town. THe fast pace of mineral maps makes it harder for me to keep up with others because I'm new at this game, but that makes the gameplay much more exciting.

 

Fast money maps don't have a hell of alota strategy to them, sure...

But it can be a lot of fun if you have a few friends. Specifically, 3 people vs. 5 computers. You may think it’s easy with three people, but when they both suck...well, it's much tougher. I spent so much time trying to save my friends/attack/raid I actually got a better rush then playing a real game.

Now, fast money no rush max units...

Well...

Who ever thought of that idea should be tied to a chair on fire and be forced to watch Oprah dance naked while getting kicked in the nuts every three minutes by Turkish wrestlers. It’s not so much the concept as the people who play them. I mean, whether your team wins or loses, SOMEONE is bound to say "U SUX N00B!!!"

Then again, maybe I'm being to harsh...it does keep them away from people who arn't ten.

 

Really? I play fast maps all the time and never been called a noob, even when I first started. The max cap can be very annoying to the losing team. One of the games I played, my team one because since all three of use were spamming carriers, we filled the population cap, thus our enemies couldn't rebuild after attacks and weren't able to defend thier bases after thier army got defeated.

 

Well, I admit I only played that game type twice.

You can probably guess the reason.

Edit:

One win, one loss.

 

my record: 11 win-19 loss. But not all these are on money maps. On money maps, I have about a 3:2 record, I'm just not too good on regular maps yet...

Also, some of those loses are forfeits because my team is retarded and people drop out for no reason, being outnumbered, I quit.

 

Ha! Stark contrast...

I like to go down fighting with everything I've got, no matter what the odds. I've even sent in my command center and attacked with SCVs in the enemy base against about eight carriers.

It never works, but a loss is a loss, right?

 

Well, you know your going to lose when after 5 minutes, its a 1 v 3 battle, unless your fighting complete noobs.

 

i think that fastest maps are good for new players because it lets u learn how to micromanage and get used to that fast pace style of play

and they are fun to break up the rapidity of low money maps.....


and everyone is forgetting about bgh there pretty fun as well

 

I've played BGH maps before on b-net, but what makes them different from regular maps?

 

BGH is different from a regular map in that it is a money map. The only difference it has from other money maps is that it was made by Blizzard. Take the mineral/gas deposits in the bases and divide them by two, and you'll have a better idea of the standard normal map setup.

--

Also, on battle.net net, never having been called a noob is only a reflection of your inexperience. You could have a pro go on battle.net, slaughter in every game, and given time, some idiot will call them a noob, even as they are being killed.

The inexperience also makes it easier for me to understand why money maps still have an appeal to you. On my first account, in my first hundred or so games, I too played on money maps. But I found out, eventually, that each game was the same as the previous, strategies never varied, and I was just not having fun even if I was winning. So I moved on.

 

I like the mineral maps because you don't have to wait 10 minutes to get large armies build up.

I play non mineral maps a few times, they just take longer for anything to happen, and rushes tend to hurt me more because I try to build a stable resourse center before building a large army.