For some time I haven't really played 1v1 HotS (and probably won't in the foreseeable future since I got LotV beta to play 1v1), because my wife always wants to play me team games with her. From these, I really like 2v2 the most and big part of it is the map pool. With three vetoes, both in season 1 and 2, the map pool can be crafted for nice macro play - the two worst maps (Avalnache and Croocked maw) were replaced in the last map pool update by similarly anti-macro maps (Omicron and Seetihnig jungle), so the pool we play stays exactly the same, the last veto being Katherine square (which has superficially the easiest naturals, but anything past that is undefendable).
The remaing maps actually feel quite similar with the obvious expection of Old Country (where we just do a greedy two-base push breaking the rocks, however as we rank up, it goes to macro game more and more often and is usually quite epic) and somewhat also of Preservation (where highly mobility-based play is very strong). However I was surprised to see that according to the game client, our win ration on Crystal pools is 80 % and on Desert Refuge only 40 % - wtf, these maps are so similar in structure! I think a lot that comes from us greedily taking the gold on Desert Refuge and getting shot down from the high ground ...
Another surprise from looking at the winrates was Wolfe Industries Compound - that's the map I like subjectively the most, but we only win 38 % of games on it (compated to 75 % on both Preservation and Old Country, both maps where I feel less comfortable on). It's probably because it creates so much 5-base, whole map mining games to remember; on the other hand, we lose a lot in mid-game because my Terran wife has troubles establishing a nat (while I take the inbase gold as 15 hatch) and that's easily forgettable.
There used to be a lot of contempt for 2v2, often based on dismissing the maps as "rush", but those times are long gone. The current ladder map pool is awesome and almost everytime we sit down and play, we get multiple totally epic games with so much stuff happening. 3v3 and 4v4 can be also fun sometimes, but I just don't feel most of the current maps give enough space for really great games.
|
my problem with 2v2 and team games in general is usually that if you don't have friends to play with it can be hard to find a team with good communication. and the problem includes me, i tend to avoid talking to my teammates because i automatically assume they're going to be assholes. and to be fair they usually are. but yeah, i'm no good at coordinating and strategizing with someone else, i'm more of a lone wolf
but deep down i always really want to enjoy 2v2/team games i'll always have some level of competitive drive to play 1v1, but i love the feeling of being involved in a big fight where my success or failure doesn't dictate everything. for 4v4 (never really tried 3v3) another problem i usually have is that i go so tryhard with my macro and multitasking that i never end up looking at what's going on with my allies, so when the game ends i feel like a bunch of stuff happened that i wasn't even paying attention to. sometimes i agree with the people who want slower engagements in starcraft if only for team games, because i think it would be awesome to have big 4-8 player battles where everyone is microing units in and out and spreading them and it lasts longer than 5 seconds
|