Map (2) Checkpoint 1v1

For the most part, should play like a normal TvZ. Zergs will have the advantage of being able to scout Terran quickly, and a somewhat short air-rush distance and good terrain for Mutas will force Terrans to cut back on the greed. This is offset by the fact that the terrain is good for late-mech. The balance will vary widely depending on the level of the players.

Again, should play like out like a PvZ on Ground Zero, except Protosses will have the initial scouting advantage and should always have the favorable build in the beginning. Not too out from the norm. I would expect less mid-game army heavy plays by Zerg, due to the terrain.

Terran should be fairly favored here. Timing pushes will be strong w/ constricted terrain and short rush distance, and 3 base 2-1 timing shouldn't be a problem for Terrans to play either. Center cliffs also give more viability to drop play, which would aid in defending. The advantage shouldn't be so overwhelming that Protoss can never win, but the Terran favor is there. Also, split-map PvT is super lame ;p

I don't have much to say in this matchup in general, other than the fact that those center high grounds seem like it'll make breaking defensive positions more difficult

2 player map w/ fairly short air rush distance will always make for nice ZvZ, though I can't comment on what subtle impacts the map architecture has for the matchup

I see Protosses in general scouting a little later on this map, since you can get away with that on 2player maps. Gateways/robo openers should be more common than fast expansion openings (core double, DT double, gate double, etc). Should, again, play like Neo/Ground Zero.

THEORYCRAFTING TIME!

Here are some ideas, thrown idly around:
One could interpret this as a forced-left-spawns map, so if you want that whole SC2 schebang of limiting the starting arrangements, try out a random trigger to switch the start-pos between left and right. Obviously you wouldn't change the current start locations, so in 1v1 etc it'd still be fine.

The first point I'd like to make is: expo choice . Here, there is none really. Now having both expo choice and dynamic control features a-la Destination completely spoils us because its so hard to perfect, but so delightful. But here, "yep, you've got your bases/respective halves of the map, that's that, macro up with lots of gas and throw shit at eachother". I mean, that's totally fine if you want to promote [Protoss q; ] that style of play on this map ... but I fear that brand would be all that's possible ]:

Which brings us to the second point: dynamic control. There's nothing to fight for. By controlling the expansions, you don't get any advantage over your opponent except more money. I dunno, I just don't feel the middle left expo is on the same level of desirability and value as the middle expo on Ride of Valkyeries or BlitzX for example. There's nothing to fight over, its much more of a macro focus. Maybe that's one of the reason 3-player-maps like Athena (II) and Longinus (II) (and many more too) were interesting because it was a ballance between map control, defending your main, and who could secure the contested rich expansion. Come to think of it, that dynamic is AWESOME, it stimulates your brain man, there's potential for something interesting "I wonder who's gonna get the cake?" ...


2v2 map resource count: 3 reasonably easy gas , 1min only, 1 far gas apiece. 2 contested. I dunno, I guess it isn't tooo easy for Z to grab the main as their 3rd ->4 (5) gas ftw.


Overall, try it out spawining in the Right Hand Side Mains, maybe that could alleviate concerns of overly near rush distances. You may have to swap the widths of the nat chokes. Also, is there no way to have a desirable, exposed expo somewhere along the central axis of the map (exposed exactly like in Othello - defended but at the same time cliffable)? No love for the mineral onlys?

Along the lines of making something worthwhile to fight over, could you maybe take the sort of symmetric expo layout from the top of Snowflake Sandwitch and apply it to the left, that is, open, with contestable expos. It just seems like a potential issue that, with a bit of map control (i.e. control two chokes) you get 6 gas, so make the far side more exposed and more volatiel.


Lemme know what you think, and please feel free smack my theorycrafting outta the air with your SCMDraft toolbrushes!