First of all, host with Use Map Settings so allies spawn together. Its as simple as that.
Secondly, the mains are surprisingly large, with each player getting a very decent amount of buildable space. Its particularly easy at blue and yellow spawns. If you spawn at red, you can still place macro hatches down comfortably, and your team mates should be able to carry on happily.
And because spawns are fixed every game, you can pick exactly which spot you want to spawn at. So you and your team can strategically choose which race/player gets which expo easier and stuff like that. Therefore if you want zerg on a side base its no problem.
|
Replying to someones PM, I ended up writing quite a bit, so I thought Id post it incase others are interested.
Im glad you like the main and natural set up on (6)Redheart Bridge. Hmm shame you dont like the middle though. The map you linked (Arakan Citadel http://www.gburri.org/bordel/Starcraft 2/Maps/3v3/Arakan_Citadel.jpg) is very chokey, and has many expansions all behind these thin chokes. If 1 team is able to control the side paths, they lock down all 8 expansions. Holding the centre path is also easy as it too is very thin. Im talking about the map as if it were a Brood War map. The map would have very turtley gameplay (which can be ok on its own) but it would also have very Static gameplay (which is very boring due to low interaction with the opponent, and can have a coinflip unpredictable end game when there is this much money).
Compare to my map, maybe you can see how that as you move out further onto the map, each choke is progressively wider than the last. eg if you spawn in the bottom left corner, you are most likely to expand towards the bottom right corner. So this means you take control of the small hill and the small low ground choke next to it. However, if you then want to push your frontline forward so that you cut off the enemy from moving across the bridge (and somewhat take more control over the island base), you have to move forward and set up at a choke that is wider than before.
And similarly, if you later want to move out even further so that you block the enemy from moving through the centre path, you have to move forward and control an even wider choke still!
This all should assist in making the gameplay conducive to a style where you have to gradually extend your zone of control and it is progressively harder to do so. This leads to high interaction with your opponent (both literal fighting and also build order decision tree choices), and it leads to a gradual ramp up in volatility which is ultimately more fun basically.
So, strangely enough it seems to me that my map does what you mentioned you want (that if one team tries to contain, the other team can still make a comeback by expanding in the other direction). While I would say that the map you linked is actually quite severely guilty of the very thing you dont like. This is because one team is able to block off both side paths very easily (if it were a brood war map that is) and there is only 1 other path available and that path is far away, and also pretty thin. (It even has a watch tower overlooking it which would help the containing team to react to backstab attempts but that doesnt apply to Brood War ofcourse).
But that is just my analysis. It looks to me like arakan citadel is very chokey and the containing team has a huge advantage. If the frontline were to get broken, the containing team can easily fall back a tiny amount to the next very thin choke and continue starving out the enemy.
It may be that you have a personal taste towards slightly more chokey maps though or something like that. And maybe maps with a higher base count. Its true that on my map, there are relatively few bases. The reason I went with this setup currently is because it is a 3v3 shared main map so there is already a large number of units out on the map even with lower econ than in 1v1 games. By reigning in the econ a little in a 3v3 helps things not to get too out of hand in the lategame where the amount of damage output is very high and so it helps prevent things flipping too quickly, more satisfying gameplay is the idea. But maybe its too much and the map would have a stalemate gameplay endgame. But I think with 3v3 and the amount of resources already offered it will probably be good.
Going back, its also true the middle is quite open on my map. On shared main maps, you can end up with very large armies, so you simply need the space somewhere for these armies to manoeuvre but also for balance. You have to be able to defeat large siege tank supported armies on shared main 3v3 maps otherwise terran can get too strong. So there are 2 large battlefields on (6)Redheart Bridge. But on the map you linked there are none, and all the paths are essentially the same width all the time. Theres no opportunity for surrounds (a basic vital technique) and no choice to flank on the strategic scale as there are only 3 paths. While Redheart Bridge has 7 decent paths with various tactical considerations. To me the centre is just more complex and rich in a good way.
Your statement: "you can see the way the map works (arakan citadel) that even if you fully block one exit, your opponent still has access to half of the mineral nodes."
I guess its just funny because I think the statement applies to my map quite strongly. You can even go in to the smaller scale early game and apply it as well. Im referring to a situation where if one team were to contain the other into just their main base. So both the 9 o clock and the 6 o clock natural are being denied for the bottom left team for example. Well they can still escape the main by killing the eggs on the 3rd ramp and get out that way.
But you were talking about the later phase of the game and the central pathways. But again, if one team were to take control of the 2 hills, well the other team can bypass it by going over the bridges, bypass it by going through the middle (all of which are decently wide paths) and therefore threaten backstabs or execute large strategic level surrounds to regain some territory control.
They can also take the island bases instead, or they can simply engage head on because the paths near the hills are mostly unbuildable and the hills themselves are unbuildable too so the contain wont be overly strong. And thats great because we now have direct player interaction instead of; ok you take 4 expansions behind one choke, I will take the other 4 expansions behind one choke and now we have so much money we build anything at all, you have no way of knowing what Im building because the map is locked down in static gameplay (apart from comsat scan), and the eventual potential coinflip reveal of max army size, and the game ends very quickly after a long 'single player' build up phase.
Your statement: "I feel like controlling the middle or the main exit on Redheart Bridge, it is a bit like on Hunters in that it gives too much of an advantage and access to resource nodes."
I would say Hunters is very chokey; every path leads through the dead centre. This is the opposite on Redheart Bridge though, where there are 7 paths, all of which are atleast quite wide, some are really quite decently wide. There are also large open battle spaces on Redheart Bridge. In my opinion, it really isnt easy (even possible) to properly lock down the mid. And if they have soft control of the middle of the map, well that isnt able to stop you taking the corner expansion and/or an island base because the corner expansion is defensible in multiple ways such that a smaller army can slow down and prevent a larger army from marching towards it, doing damage to it, or killing workers without them being able to retreat.
The middle area overall is big enough that there will always be an area where the defending team can focus and concentrate their forces to punch a hole through to somewhere important. So if one team were to control the middle or the main exit then wow, good on them! That must be very difficult to achieve. Actually, what do you mean by the main exit? I feel like you probably mean 1 of the huge battlegrounds that have a large diamond of asphalt.
And controlling the 'middle', well there is the centre base area, and there are the 2 large battlegrounds either side of it (what I think you are calling the main exits). So when you say 'controlling the middle' do you mean controlling all 3 of these areas? Because that is a huge amount of territory. If you can control all that, you are playing the game and winning. The map isnt getting in the way.
Or by middle do you mean just the centre base area on its own, and therefore you dont also control the battleground to the side. Because in that scenario you are certainly not restricting access to resources.
Your statement: "Take my opinion with a grain of salt though. I am no expert when it comes to maps and I usually turn towards Xiphias or Avex for advice ^^."
Yeah I may just be misinterpreting your analysis by mistake a bit. And you may have been using that map just to demonstrate one point, so I may have been analysing other aspects of it that you didnt ever consider relevant. (although often on maps 1 aspect influences another so you have to look at them as a whole, and we are talking about a sort of macroscopic topic, 'the whole of the centre layout in general').
And simply it might just be that some players would prefer a 3v3 map to be slightly more chokey and with a few more expansions on or something like that, which is fine. 1 map cannot cover all tastes obviously. Xiphias and Avex are both outstanding in their fields but they are starbow and sc2 mapping respectively while Im Brood War 
But really no one is truly an expert in shared main 3v3 mapping today unless there is a secret underground proscene that I dont know about haha.
But the good thing is we dont have to be experts. Hopefully I might have convinced you to give the map a try or maybe you might have given it a try anyway despite your first impressions of the middle. And hopefully some fun might be had. Who knows, if you play it, the map itself might convince you even if I cant heh.
Thanks for actually bothering to give me your opinion in the first place by the way, much appreciated. And maybe the map would benefit from another expansion or something, between the corner base and the island for example. But Ill probably leave it as is for a bit.
|
WCS![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4Y0rJH7.jpg)
