Posted 15 May 2014 - 09:12 PM
alaskan outback is a great map.... one of the more difficult maps to play and offers an unlimited number of build orders and expansions.
attacking at multiple places is key, and as a result forces players to split more making the game very high active with high micro...
Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:16 PM
Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:36 PM
More like a sparring map, with no point to it. Just a battlefield thats huge!alaskan outback is a great map.... one of the more difficult maps to play and offers an unlimited number of build orders and expansions.
attacking at multiple places is key, and as a result forces players to split more making the game very high active with high micro...
Edited by ExpaNd, 15 May 2014 - 10:37 PM.
Posted 15 May 2014 - 11:10 PM
It has a very limited number of builds due to the poorly sized (far too small) ore patches.
As for making changes to the map pool- well perhaps when Olaf is back, but I think that's in 3 weeks.
I agree tho, Alaskan is not suitable for the quick match.
ok, thanks for letting me know.
damn that olaf has some nice holidays 
Posted 25 May 2014 - 02:54 AM
More like a sparring map, with no point to it. Just a battlefield thats huge!
You just don't see the strategical depth to it. It's got a lot to it. Some top players like Tim and Marko and latof seem to know how to play it..
No really long games, just takes more of a strategic mind to play it well. as for what Josh said the BO's on that map are only limited by play style.
Considering I've never seen you try anything crazy or out of the box, besides standard sovs, amongst many players who belong in the same category.
The opinions for the map remain the same from players of such categories, Mason and myself are used to trying new unorthodox strategies thus we like the map because of the freedom it offers for a creative mind.
I recall some one talking about Tim using a 'crazy' bo of making an early 2nd mcv on that map for fast expanding. There's one out of the box thinker, the map was designed as a long game map as ra2 doesn't have many. It's designed for testing skills as well with it's balanced layout, thus it does belong in the competitive arena. I can see that nowdays most players would much rather have all the maps play and feel the same for quick instant nostaligc gratification which could be interpreted as fun for some.
Posted 26 May 2014 - 04:42 PM
Lol talking to the wrong person, I play all maps and countries and try to use all strategies...however Tomi's point still stands.You just don't see the strategical depth to it. It's got a lot to it. Some top players like Tim and Marko and latof seem to know how to play it..
No really long games, just takes more of a strategic mind to play it well. as for what Josh said the BO's on that map are only limited by play style.
Considering I've never seen you try anything crazy or out of the box, besides standard sovs, amongst many players who belong in the same category.
The opinions for the map remain the same from players of such categories, Mason and myself are used to trying new unorthodox strategies thus we like the map because of the freedom it offers for a creative mind.
I recall some one talking about Tim using a 'crazy' bo of making an early 2nd mcv on that map for fast expanding. There's one out of the box thinker, the map was designed as a long game map as ra2 doesn't have many. It's designed for testing skills as well with it's balanced layout, thus it does belong in the competitive arena. I can see that nowdays most players would much rather have all the maps play and feel the same for quick instant nostaligc gratification which could be interpreted as fun for some.
Edited by ExpaNd, 26 May 2014 - 04:47 PM.
Posted 28 May 2014 - 11:36 AM
You just don't see the strategical depth to it. It's got a lot to it. Some top players like Tim and Marko and latof seem to know how to play it..
No really long games, just takes more of a strategic mind to play it well. as for what Josh said the BO's on that map are only limited by play style.
Considering I've never seen you try anything crazy or out of the box, besides standard sovs, amongst many players who belong in the same category.
The opinions for the map remain the same from players of such categories, Mason and myself are used to trying new unorthodox strategies thus we like the map because of the freedom it offers for a creative mind.
I recall some one talking about Tim using a 'crazy' bo of making an early 2nd mcv on that map for fast expanding. There's one out of the box thinker, the map was designed as a long game map as ra2 doesn't have many. It's designed for testing skills as well with it's balanced layout, thus it does belong in the competitive arena. I can see that nowdays most players would much rather have all the maps play and feel the same for quick instant nostaligc gratification which could be interpreted as fun for some.
yo stop trying bro, your map is bullcrap.
Posted 28 May 2014 - 05:09 PM
i <3 alaskan outback
but can u guys add snowball, sinkhole and bonanza for qm, those i like to play and ra2 needs more maps like those.
New Conscript
Posted 19 June 2014 - 02:50 PM
Alaskan outback is beautiful but does indeed paralyse any sense of what to do / conquer.
The map should be remade.
As for the Path more traveled by:
I did made the map very small and just like TOE longer games can be boring.
Maby remake it again with more room in top and botom for less restrictions in moving around and splitting.
Edited by Sander1990, 19 June 2014 - 02:51 PM.
Posted 19 June 2014 - 03:31 PM
i think the map is excellent the way it is now.
u got 3 oils, 1 airport, alot of garissons. splits are still possible - paths are large enough.
you can early-midgame fight over garrisons - middle ore/gems, distract with paras, try to destroy airport, do some tricky splits/attacks, etc.
i think the map has alot of possibilities, ive played it lots, and none of the games ended up in campy games, much more in being active from the start until the end.
may be my style of playing but i can think of other maps where camping is way more easily and actually worth it (which shouldnt be, imo)
when i think of maps like amazonas delta, etc where camping is ez, u got nothing to fight for like on the path more traveled by.
p.s. i still think alaskan outback is the worst map ever and added to qm.
once again, i see no point in having such a large map (having 20k all the time and reactiontime of 2hours), like if you make a map that large, atleast add some oils/airforces and water to give some more variance.
Posted 19 June 2014 - 05:58 PM
Alaskan outback is beautiful but does indeed paralyse any sense of what to do / conquer.
That was the whole idea, to offer freedom, all other maps offer a set bo and the preferd playstyle that always comes out on top.
On Alaskan Outback you can choose which style to play and how you want to expand. Each build order path has it's weaknesses and strenghts.
I would blame that feel you're getting from the map on the static nature of all the other maps.
If you've played for years and QMed a lot you would see how every map is stuck in it's set build orders.
Posted 19 June 2014 - 06:14 PM
not meaning to sound rude or anything, but i sometimes dont get the logic and thinking of some people.
i'd love to know what build orders you're talking about, and also which weaknesses and strenghts.
you might be able to use alot of different bo's, but it doesnt matter at all which one you use, because it wont affect your opponent in any way, unlike on any other map which takes skills.
p.s. ive played qm for years and i totally disagree with you, there are alot of good maps where you can use various bo's/strategies to dominate a game.
unlike on alaskan where its ALWAYS the same game:
it might be fun to build up your base and spam miners and randomly send tanks around the map, but its no fun if you're into active, fast, competitive and skilled plays, which QM always was meant for.
dont get me wrong, the map could be perfect for 2v2 ffg's where you just chill and build up, or when you wrongly think you're playing simcity.
Edited by Tomi, 19 June 2014 - 06:28 PM.
Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:46 AM
Yet on most of the maps with large ore patches it's just a factory spam with a minor need for expansions.. Most of the new QM maps are "get rich fast" maps. There's no real eco management.
I guess I'm the only one on ra2 who likes a high macro game.
Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:53 AM
Alaskan ore patches are too small. As a result players are forced to move/build a new refinery every second minute; this restricts build strategies and largely dictates the gameplay as well.
same could be said for infinity. all in all its too large for a 1v1 map
Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:35 PM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
