Forged Alliance Forever Forged Alliance Forever Forums 2016-08-29T21:39:29+02:00 /feed.php?f=2&t=13020 2016-08-29T21:39:29+02:00 2016-08-29T21:39:29+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133819#p133819 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by tatsu — 29 Aug 2016, 21:39


]]>
2016-08-29T20:18:57+02:00 2016-08-29T20:18:57+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133814#p133814 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by Morax — 29 Aug 2016, 20:18


]]>
2016-08-29T20:02:50+02:00 2016-08-29T20:02:50+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133813#p133813 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
Airspot shuts down a large interesting part of the game too quickly. And is insanely boring to play, just spamming and hoarding a single unit and doing some eco optimization for most of the game.

Slightly overplayed, not really much room for any new or interesting strategies. Lots of possibilities if you execute then as team, but who would do that?

Regardless one of the best team maps though, would play it from time to time if it wouldn't lag so much.

Statistics: Posted by Zock — 29 Aug 2016, 20:02


]]>
2016-08-29T19:04:37+02:00 2016-08-29T19:04:37+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133812#p133812 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> I found map´s that suit my playstyle and I found map´s that don´t suit my playstyle...
Setons is a map that doesn´t suit me. But there are more than enough players that like it.

Statistics: Posted by MrSprengmeister — 29 Aug 2016, 19:04


]]>
2016-08-29T18:11:56+02:00 2016-08-29T18:11:56+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133810#p133810 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
Hawkei wrote:
It is a very restrictive map with the combination of a high reclaim start, a large number of secured mexes, and terrain which is difficult to bypass leading to a rather static eco spam game. The range of tactical options are far too limited and it is difficult to capitalise on map control.

The momentum of a forward land assault from the front position is far to easily stopped from either side pond or air positions and the map does not have any unsecured mass points, and has limited options for a multi-lane attack. The current meta of the air position, with the combination of high mass and high reclaim leads to a tech rush for T3 air superiority. Which completely marginalises any T1 and T2 air gameplay - which IMO is where some of the more interesting game diversity is to be found.

The shear pace of economic and technological advancement means that units become obsolete too quickly and this punishes early accumulation of aggressive units. That is why it is a bad map.

The words of someone who is not enlightened by the setons, sure you can play it like you described it, but there is much more to the map than what you described.

Statistics: Posted by Viba — 29 Aug 2016, 18:11


]]>
2016-08-29T08:53:19+02:00 2016-08-29T08:53:19+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133778#p133778 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
viewtopic.php?f=53&t=13014

Statistics: Posted by CookieNoob — 29 Aug 2016, 08:53


]]>
2016-08-29T06:24:50+02:00 2016-08-29T06:24:50+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133774#p133774 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
snuffles wrote:
I've never heard of Sentons, what's it look like?
... It looks like a camel's backside with a pile of shit in the middle.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 29 Aug 2016, 06:24


]]>
2016-08-29T06:18:55+02:00 2016-08-29T06:18:55+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133772#p133772 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by snuffles — 29 Aug 2016, 06:18


]]>
2016-08-29T05:09:53+02:00 2016-08-29T05:09:53+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133769#p133769 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
Blackheart wrote:
Not a bad map, just bad players

Statistics: Posted by biass — 29 Aug 2016, 05:09


]]>
2016-08-29T03:12:42+02:00 2016-08-29T03:12:42+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133765#p133765 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
The momentum of a forward land assault from the front position is far to easily stopped from either side pond or air positions and the map does not have any unsecured mass points, and has limited options for a multi-lane attack. The current meta of the air position, with the combination of high mass and high reclaim leads to a tech rush for T3 air superiority. Which completely marginalises any T1 and T2 air gameplay - which IMO is where some of the more interesting game diversity is to be found.

The shear pace of economic and technological advancement means that units become obsolete too quickly and this punishes early accumulation of aggressive units. That is why it is a bad map.

Statistics: Posted by Hawkei — 29 Aug 2016, 03:12


]]>
2016-08-29T01:31:54+02:00 2016-08-29T01:31:54+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133760#p133760 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]>
Spoiler: show
inb4 bad players from BH

Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 29 Aug 2016, 01:31


]]>
2016-08-29T01:06:38+02:00 2016-08-29T01:06:38+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133759#p133759 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by everywhere116 — 29 Aug 2016, 01:06


]]>
2016-08-29T01:05:49+02:00 2016-08-29T01:05:49+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133758#p133758 <![CDATA[Re: Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by Blackheart — 29 Aug 2016, 01:05


]]>
2016-08-29T01:03:58+02:00 2016-08-29T01:03:58+02:00 /viewtopic.php?t=13020&p=133757#p133757 <![CDATA[Why is Sentons a bad map?]]> Statistics: Posted by Mel_Gibson — 29 Aug 2016, 01:03


]]>