|
United States10774 Posts
Meet the new official Batoo OSL map.
OnGameNet decided to replace 'Plasma' with the brand new 'Tears of the Moon' for the upcoming season. Announced on the 15th, Tears of the Moon will join the map pool of existing Return of the King, and Proleague official maps Medusa and Sin Chupung Ryeong. No changes were made to those maps.
Tears of the Moon presents a new concept of the main base and natural design. Similar to Fantasy, which was used during Daum Starleague 2007, the main base has 8 mineral patches, as well as two destructible Refineries that open up a new path to the natural.
The third expansion has fewer mineral patches, but the saturation of each one is doubled. This will promote other variations of playstyles, instead of expansion-based plays that are currently dominating the scene.
Twilight
3 Player map
Main base: 8 minerals, 1 gas
Natural: 8 minerals, 1 gas
Tested with OnGameNet Sparkyz
Other expansions: 5 minerals, 1 gas / 4 minerals with double saturation / 4 minerals
The name comes from the moon that is placed in the middle of the map
Source
|
|
|
Seige tanks along the side of the main :o
|
Is it just me or are 6 and 10 more cramped then 2?
|
51398 Posts
|
The extra minerals in the main as well as the reduced minerals at the 3rd will hurt the Zergs in ZvP.
On December 15 2008 10:24 GTR-2-Go wrote:
REMOVE ROTK WTF
I'm vouching to keep any maps in favor of zergs.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
On December 15 2008 10:24 GTR-2-Go wrote:
REMOVE ROTK WTF
|
why remove rotk? I love that map.
FE looks awkward to not possible in pvz
|
On December 15 2008 10:27 Dazed_Spy wrote:
why remove rotk? I love that map.
They're zerg haters, the lot of them. Off with their heads!
|
51398 Posts
Well if you are keeping ROTK atleast fix the fucking minerals at the mains.
|
On December 15 2008 10:27 Dazed_Spy wrote:
why remove rotk? I love that map.
FE looks awkward to not possible in pvz
First thing I noticed
Looks pretty sick though, I love when new maps come out
|
9070 Posts
looks like a terran map to me , will give it a try ofc... and yeah bisu wont be happy with this one
|
|
|
I think FE is still possible if your objective is to protect the ramp...though covering the min line as well will be harder. You'd probably HAVE to add a third cannon and place core there to accomplish that, though.
Getting anything past a third base looks nigh impossible, imo...which will be trouble for zergs...
|
16957 Posts
Does double saturation mean they're stacked like FMP or have 10000 minerals in them?
Also:
Floating Barracks + Tanks + Bunker/Turret = probably lol.
|
I'm guessing 3000 minerals, blood bath style
|
|
|
Anyone else think the bottom base looks a little small compared to the other two? I mean, building placement will be kinda awkward with your main splitting the base into two sides. But I guess it worked fine for Medusa.
Terran seems to be able to get 4 base/3 gas just by holding one elongated ramp.
|
siege tank imba on this map.
all nat can be sieged from the wall behind (i think)
bottom base has irregular main design. it seems smaller and the building space is away from the ramp.
|
Looks weird. And only one map, makes me not fully satisfied. (for osl)
|
It'll make people stop once they secure their third because their third will last them a long time.
I think they'll be clockwise-counterclockwise issues with this map. Because if you're clockwise from your opponent, you have two routs to their nat if you you're counter clockwise, you really only have one.
|
United States1865 Posts
i think it looks like it could be really favored towards Terran in TvP, but amazing for the other matchups.
I really appreciate that they are finally trying to encourage different playstyles with the maps
|
Braavos36374 Posts
every time a map is released there will inevitably be people yelling "omfg siege tanks will be so imba on this map!!!" lol
On December 15 2008 11:08 thunk wrote:
It'll make people stop once they secure their third because their third will last them a long time.
I think they'll be clockwise-counterclockwise issues with this map. Because if you're clockwise from your opponent, you have two routs to their nat if you you're counter clockwise, you really only have one.
you still have two... its a slightly longer distance but is it really that big a deal
|
I like it. It's different. It should yield some interesting games.
|
I wonder how testing went for this map.
Mapdori should have that info...somewhere ;O~
|
fuck i hate twilight maps... it hurts my eyes... i prefer space badland or jungle.
|
is map dl aviliable now ?
|
looks alright i guess
on closer inspection a lot of areas seem a bit awkward, but i can't really say for sure this far zoomed out
is there a bigger picture available? and when will it be released to the public for dl?
(tried googling it but all i got was WoW)
|
On December 15 2008 11:13 Hot_Bid wrote:every time a map is released there will inevitably be people yelling "omfg siege tanks will be so imba on this map!!!" lol Show nested quote +On December 15 2008 11:08 thunk wrote:
It'll make people stop once they secure their third because their third will last them a long time.
I think they'll be clockwise-counterclockwise issues with this map. Because if you're clockwise from your opponent, you have two routs to their nat if you you're counter clockwise, you really only have one. you still have two... its a slightly longer distance but is it really that big a deal
I think that it's perhaps not as big of a deal as I made it out to be but consider a Protoss at 6 and a Zerg at 10. If the Protoss FE's and the Zerg does some sort of ling or hydra all in, it'd be more advantageous for the Zerg to be at 10 than it would for him to be at 3.
The same is true of in PvP a 2 gate + reaver against a 3 gate goon + obs, if you're at 10 (the 2 gate/reaver) you (who spawned at 10) have two routes and set up a really nice flank. You're limited to fighting from one side if you had spawned at 3.
I can think of quite a few cool narrow timings where players to do all-in rushes because you're directly clockwise from your opponent that you couldn't do if you were counter-clockwise from your opponent that you would also have to consider in your build choice.
|
Is the ground behind the nat unbuildable? If it is muta abuse 
|
vulture harass too
cool looking map though, hope the different mains don't really affect play
|
would 1 storm be able to kill all the workers at the 3rd? :S
edit: the mineral only third.... which one is the third..?
|
It looks really cool. I like it.
|
Nice... No island expands though.
edit: i don't think anybody's gonna try to take the mid expansions lol.
|
On December 15 2008 11:28 thunk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2008 11:13 Hot_Bid wrote:every time a map is released there will inevitably be people yelling "omfg siege tanks will be so imba on this map!!!" lol On December 15 2008 11:08 thunk wrote:
It'll make people stop once they secure their third because their third will last them a long time.
I think they'll be clockwise-counterclockwise issues with this map. Because if you're clockwise from your opponent, you have two routs to their nat if you you're counter clockwise, you really only have one. you still have two... its a slightly longer distance but is it really that big a deal I think that it's perhaps not as big of a deal as I made it out to be but consider a Protoss at 6 and a Zerg at 10. If the Protoss FE's and the Zerg does some sort of ling or hydra all in, it'd be more advantageous for the Zerg to be at 10 than it would for him to be at 3. The same is true of in PvP a 2 gate + reaver against a 3 gate goon + obs, if you're at 10 (the 2 gate/reaver) you (who spawned at 10) have two routes and set up a really nice flank. You're limited to fighting from one side if you had spawned at 3. I can think of quite a few cool narrow timings where players to do all-in rushes because you're directly clockwise from your opponent that you couldn't do if you were counter-clockwise from your opponent that you would also have to consider in your build choice.
I don't dislike the map, but I don't think I can say that I like the looks of it either. I think your points are very valid, and I fear that at the pro-level the map may turn out to be far more positionally imbalanced that expected. I think players will have to prepare twice the number of builds on this map for any particular match, based on their starting location and the opponent's starting location relative to their own.
Of course, I hope it turns out to be a great map, too~
|
8 mineral patches at the main should definitely help out zerg, too
|
On December 15 2008 11:38 traced wrote:
8 mineral patches at the main should definitely help out zerg, too
Edit: Nvm, I'm an idiot.
|
Is 6's natural cliffable but not the other starting spots' nats?
|
early ZvT is gonna be tough.....probably gonna have to 2 hatch
|
Wasn't something like this supposed to have been used about a year ago?
That or something like it maybe for 2v2?
|
think this is gonna be a Terran favored map imo.
|
|
|
The map begs for 2hatch ZvT I agree, just wondering if we will see more 1baseplay from terran or if they will go mech. I guess this will be a Z>P map is that nat needs cannonwhoring or they have to 2gate with fairly good distance between positions.
|
On December 15 2008 11:50 ZidaneTribal wrote:
early ZvT is gonna be tough.....probably gonna have to 2 hatch
I think tvz looks pretty hard against 2 hatch muta on the map. The cliffs at the nat.
I bet terrans will make a factory in the ground next to the wall and lift it into zergs main.
Or maybe proxies behind the nat. I can already feel the potential proxy 2 gates in terran main when this map gets released.
|
Not sure what to think with that mineral lay out
|
Russian Federation386 Posts
Looks like a zerg map. Finally.
|
muta statue in the middle o_O
|
FEing should work decenly, like you get a cannon below and to the right of the nexus if you spawn at bottom. But creating that door and blocking it... will be difficult vs some Zerg all-in. Less minerals = Zerg map in general, so I think Zergs should do fine here.
|
On December 15 2008 12:03 Ilikestarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2008 11:50 ZidaneTribal wrote:
early ZvT is gonna be tough.....probably gonna have to 2 hatch I think tvz looks pretty hard against 2 hatch muta on the map. The cliffs at the nat. I bet terrans will make a factory in the ground next to the wall and lift it into zergs main. Or maybe proxies behind the nat. I can already feel the potential proxy 2 gates in terran main when this map gets released.
Indeed the nat seems to be hard to protect from the muta harass. Especially that it seems one wont be able to build turrets behind the minerals. I don't think Terrans will have such an easy map as many people above implied.
I totally agree with Hot_Bid that each time the map is released people are screaming "tanks are imba on this map" 
|
|
|
interesting map...
i already noe my fav spot... 3o clock and then 6 lols
|
On December 15 2008 12:45 jodogohoo wrote:
muta statue in the middle o_O
I assumed it was a traditional templar statue. How can you tell?
|
The long distances in between should still make PvZ FE viable, although the classic zergling run-by's might be an added worry though. Added the fact that there's a lot of space for worker scouting, I think Protoss should adapt just fine in the mu.
It looks well suited for a Zerg comeback to the OSL, looks absolutely great for ZvT imo.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Namja Iyagi meets The Eye imo
|
i think 3rd gas would be ezier to take than the mineral expo next to nat... friggin cliff over looking that mineral expo is threatening...
|
On December 15 2008 10:24 kazokun wrote:
Is it just me or are 6 and 10 more cramped then 2?
it does look like that, it might be because there is no dark patches in 2 though...
|
tons of positional differences
2 o'clock main's HUGE, 6 o'clock natural ramp's tiny, 2 and 10 can be proxyed inside the base
that said, they should give the gameplay some interesting bit of twists. P's gonna reap it on this map
|
Russian Federation4333 Posts
I knew they would make 8 mineral mains to Z>P the maps up. <3
|
this looks like a crazy map :o
i think its gonna end up imba for at least one race/mu tho. cant say for sure which yet but at least one lol >>
|
is there a place we can download the map now?
|
Looks better than Plasma.
|
I bet this map is completely balanced
|
Korea (South)3086 Posts
I think a new tileset would add a little more novelty to maps. I love the map design but it seems like I'm looking at something similar since the last year.
|
|
|
another attempt for make a terran favored map... and destroy protoss empire, maybe bisu or stork find a way to change it to favor them XD
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
This will end up being Zerg favored vs P imo sooo many routes to the natural
|
Yeah, some hydra all-ins seem really deadly on this map. Also, lurker slowdrops seem pretty viable since the slow overlords have to travel for so little time.
|
|
|
hehe maybe plexa its right. i think that protoss will be forced to proxy and frontal builds... like always just the time will tell the truth
|
forgive me for being noob, but what is the use of the two destructible Refineries?
Is the choke wider after the refinery is destroyed?
|
moon in the center > rest of the map :D
|
Netherlands6142 Posts
On December 15 2008 23:26 JieXian wrote:
forgive me for being noob, but what is the use of the two destructible Refineries?
Is the choke wider after the refinery is destroyed?
They Power Generators actually (i.e. geyser won't appear after they're destroyed. I guess destroying them would open up a new path to the natural which may effectively be used for harass or reinforcement.
Also, dl plskthx
|
Terran can siege the main from the middle, right? :/
|
God damnit rotk needs to diagf 
|
On December 16 2008 03:03 Crunchums wrote:God damnit rotk needs to diagf
die in a gay fire?
|
so if you destroy the Power Generators u will have 3 routs to the natural?
die in a grease fire = diagf (dont know if u were ironic or not)
|
On December 16 2008 03:52 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:die in a gay fire?
I think it's die in a giant fire
|
damn interesting map,
Cant wait for the pro's to play on it.
|
Seems quite anti toss, which is good.
|
wow, 10 is really really small inbase, protoss could have problems here
|
On December 15 2008 11:57 Aurious wrote:
Wasn't something like this supposed to have been used about a year ago?
That or something like it maybe for 2v2?
Perhaps you are thinking of the map Sword in the Moon, which the community eventually decided to call Harmony. I think it had something to do with multiple translations.
|
Can't wait to see ZvP on this map.
|
On December 16 2008 04:03 Shauni wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2008 03:52 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On December 16 2008 03:03 Crunchums wrote:God damnit rotk needs to diagf die in a gay fire? I think it's die in a giant fire
Die in a gotdamn fire?
|
On December 16 2008 05:40 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:
wow, 10 is really really small inbase, protoss could have problems here
There's a ton of space toward the top of the base though. I think that equals it out.
|
On December 16 2008 09:45 lgdDante wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2008 05:40 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:
wow, 10 is really really small inbase, protoss could have problems here There's a ton of space toward the top of the base though. I think that equals it out.
Yeah these bases all look huge imo. Should fit all of the buildings P could need... even without taking into account that this map has less resources than many.
|
Nice name & nice look. But 3 twilights in 4 maps OMFG... Am I going to see ICE in my life again?
|
Also this map LACKS mineral... and calls for multiple expansions
Not bad for Zergs, ha
|
FE is still possible... maybe you guys have forgotten about 2gate expo! with gates in the nat ^^
|
|
|
On December 15 2008 22:06 Plexa wrote:This will end up being Zerg favored vs P imo sooo many routes to the natural
I was actually going to argue this too, but not for that reason. It's cause OGN zergs tested it, meaning ZvT will be impossible (OGN zergs ZvT really good -> map really hard for other teams' ZvT) while their ZvP is going to be really easy (OGN zergs ZvP really bad -> map really easy for other teams' ZvP). It was hard to write that eloquently and it's not very witty either.
|
16957 Posts
To be fair, I think this'll be a reversion to the old 1 base Protoss vs. 2 base Zerg style. Keep in mind that a nat that's hard to defend with static defense also disadvantages Zerg, especially in ZvT. Remember that cute attack on RoV that someone did a while back (sorry I forget...he basically mined the minerals and sent in MM)? That's entirely possible now, except you won't have to wait to mine the minerals either. Setting up a Sunken Line will also be difficult.
EDIT: Also, it looks like in TvP, if Terran controls the third (the one on the high ground), with mech, then he also easily defends the fourth (the low ground one separated from the nat).
And diagf means die in a grease fire.
|
nah I'm sure the pros will come up with some insane forge/gateway/cannon placement that effectively blocks both entrances to the natural
|
On December 16 2008 11:53 blabber wrote:
nah I'm sure the pros will come up with some insane forge/gateway/cannon placement that effectively blocks both entrances to the natural
I'm thinking the plyon is going to be in the middle.  Then again, it looks like a long path for lings but those little buggers are pretty fast.
Ugh, I guess I'll have to watch the pros.
|
On December 15 2008 22:10 thedeadhaji wrote:noooo plasma i wish they tried to make Plasma II
Agreed! I liked Plasma alot even though it was imba .
|
I could see carriers on this map. Those narrow passages seems good for carrier micro. Though the open middle doesn't look too good for carriers.
|
I think its possible for Protoss to FE getting 3 cannons and 2 probes on the ramp...
|
Russian Federation4333 Posts
|
wow, uhh, big mains *looks for places to proxy*
-I like how the natural can be "flanked", which is practically impossible in most maps.
-The 6 main looks kinda small
-Nat is siegeable.
-Looks kinda hard to Forge Expand here, since lings can get in two angles.
-I like how the 3rd can "secure" a fourth min only. Ok nevermind, 4 patches only, but at least the 3rd has a gas, 3 gas = happy Protoss.
|
On December 16 2008 11:56 ilistis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2008 11:53 blabber wrote:
nah I'm sure the pros will come up with some insane forge/gateway/cannon placement that effectively blocks both entrances to the natural I'm thinking the plyon is going to be in the middle. Then again, it looks like a long path for lings but those little buggers are pretty fast. Ugh, I guess I'll have to watch the pros.
hmm, yeah I forgot to consider the distances between mains..oh wait, they're not that far actually.
A 9-pool may force the Toss to go 2 cannons before gateway, therefore, forcing the Protoss to delay the gateway.
Oh wait, I think I found an area where a pylon forge double cannon can be placed even if the lings come from one side. I'm still visualizing though on the scenario if speedlings come in from 2 sides, maybe blocking the ramp with 3-5 probes will do...
I think 12 hatch will be easy, cuz if a gateway is placed in a way that it will delay the lings even if they flank, it will make the lings run a greater distance. By that time, the group of lings that came from one side might be dead already and the cannon is sitting pretty to kill the ones who took a detour....
Not sure though
|
|
|
I like this map...
... NOT
|
|
|
Twilight
3 Player map
Main base: 8 minerals, 1 gas
Natural: 8 minerals, 1 gas
Tested with OnGameNet Sparkyz
Other expansions: 5 minerals, 1 gas / 4 minerals with double saturation / 4 minerals
The name comes from the moon that is placed in the middle of the map
Does this mean 2 min patches are stacked on top of each other at those 4patch min onlys?
|
Seems like a haven for siege tanks and mutalisks.
Though probably not too good for zerg overall duo to the tiny openings.
Also I've noticed an unbalance immidiately: The 6 O'clock natural expansion is walled in worse than other 2 main expansions!
Does this mean 2 min patches are stacked on top of each other at those 4patch min onlys?
It can mean that 2 workers can mine from 1 patch at the same time since he said saturated, or it can be that when you mine out the 4 minerals there will be additional 4 minerals on their place.
|
The minerals at the low ground near your nat and the minerals and gas at the neutral exp on the high ground are 3000 mins in a patch and 10000 gas in the geyser.
I'm 99% positive that you cant have 2 workers mining the same patch, just the quantity is increased making those expos very valuable in the mid/late game(especially the one with the gas).
|
unfortunately the download doesn't seem to work
|
It works for me. You simply open the link and click on the ???? above the JPG of the map
|
Yeah, and rename the files. The map seems interesting, but I'm wondering about Zerg getting a 4th gas. Possibly they should get the second gas nat of another main, but that seems pretty vulnerable...
|
lol, here's the T tactic:
Tanks right outside of that "wall" just outside the base, dropship, gg
|
On December 17 2008 05:39 stambe wrote:
It works for me. You simply open the link and click on the ???? above the JPG of the map
Could you host it somewhere please? IT also doesn't seem to work for me...
Maybe if you do the mods can add it to the TLPD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will try again... What kind of an advantage do you really get from destroying the power generators? From what I can see, there are two ways in the nat, and if you destroy the power generators, you would only get another way down the same choke.. Or do I see it all wrong?
|
On December 17 2008 08:10 Patrio wrote:
I will try again... What kind of an advantage do you really get from destroying the power generators? From what I can see, there are two ways in the nat, and if you destroy the power generators, you would only get another way down the same choke.. Or do I see it all wrong?
Yep, that's a bit weird. I don't really see the point of opening them.
I played my first game on this map five minutes ago using the Fantasy build, it was quite nice.
I was sick of Python and Blue Storm.
|
On December 17 2008 08:22 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I was sick of Python and Blue Storm.
Haha, true...
|
United States13143 Posts
On December 17 2008 08:10 Patrio wrote:
I will try again... What kind of an advantage do you really get from destroying the power generators? From what I can see, there are two ways in the nat, and if you destroy the power generators, you would only get another way down the same choke.. Or do I see it all wrong?
To get access to your minonly, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
On December 17 2008 04:19 stambe wrote:
The minerals at the low ground near your nat and the minerals and gas at the neutral exp on the high ground are 3000 mins in a patch and 10000 gas in the geyser.
I'm 99% positive that you cant have 2 workers mining the same patch, just the quantity is increased making those expos very valuable in the mid/late game(especially the one with the gas).
This seems to be right.
Total minerals = 3 [ (8+8+4)(1500) + (4+5)(3000) ] = 171000
Total vespene = 3 [ (1+1)(5000) + (1)(10000) ] = 60000
|
Hard for protoss forge wallins?
ZvP winning streak gogogo.
|
|
|
yeah siege tanks will have a field day against P's on this map...
|
just played a game on this map and realized: the power generators are stacked!
|
On December 17 2008 12:23 blabber wrote:
just played a game on this map and realized: the power generators are stacked!
How many times were they stacked?
|
at least two, haha. I haven't thoroughly checked yet, maybe someone else can.
|
On December 17 2008 13:20 kazokun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2008 12:23 blabber wrote:
just played a game on this map and realized: the power generators are stacked! How many times were they stacked?
Exactly 2 times each.
|
I think this will be hard for Protoss, they're testing how good Bisu and Stork are to be able to pull wins on this map since securing a Forge Wall-in would be hard and the nat is flankable if the initiative goes to the other player.
|
Will force toos to make someting new for FE or go one base start and then expo after =D
Terra will play as usual, but this map would make easy to fast academy rush on zerg to take his expo since theres 2 entrys, zerg will have to make 2-3 sunkens each side to defende Expo
|
On December 18 2008 06:36 checo wrote:
Will force toos to make someting new for FE or go one base start and then expo after =D
Terra will play as usual, but this map would make easy to fast academy rush on zerg to take his expo since theres 2 entrys, zerg will have to make 2-3 sunkens each side to defende Expo
Having 2 entrances to your nat is just weird...but yeah, I think Terran will have an easier time because they can turtle easy, but if other races manage to abuse the turret time (the siege tanks require to rotate their trunks), then maybe, their nat will be flankable too.
|
On December 18 2008 06:53 Infinity.SkyLark wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2008 06:36 checo wrote:
Will force toos to make someting new for FE or go one base start and then expo after =D
Terra will play as usual, but this map would make easy to fast academy rush on zerg to take his expo since theres 2 entrys, zerg will have to make 2-3 sunkens each side to defende Expo Having 2 entrances to your nat is just weird...but yeah, I think Terran will have an easier time because they can turtle easy, but if other races manage to abuse the turret time (the siege tanks require to rotate their trunks), then maybe, their nat will be flankable too.
Yes but terran is used to this kinda of stuf since we always got flank, how ever toos and zerg don't usually get on that position so it should be dificult for them, also all races will need to be carefull for drops on their main since theres planty of room for this especially cause one can put units just aside the wall and lift with one or 2 drop ship/shutle/ovi
|
This map is pretty gay, they really need to make it so that siege tanks can't shoot your natural that shit is rediculous.
|
ugh tank cliffing is bullshit T_T
|
To those whining about PvT here, remember that Medusa with it's mighty 70%+ Protoss win ratio (with all but two of the Terran wins being from Flash and one of the remaining being Mind) is still in the pool. Also, TvT looks like it'll be a lot of fun.
|
Medusa is probably worse than this map in terms of balance.
I don't know much about progamer level balance. But it puzzles me why they decided terran shouldn't be able to build turrets on Medusa but they can on this map.
But it really annoys me that they still can't make maps that are all balanced. Look at all the mirrors coming up in proleague.
|
Some slight imbalances with 6'o'clock:
- The gas at the natural is able to be hit by siege tanks from behind, but is safe at the other 2 spawns.
- It's possible to move a unit between the gas geyser and the cliff to get behind the minerals, making wall-ins a little trickier.
The bases are big enough that tanks really shouldn't hit anything from the centre over those thin walls. 3'o'clock is the most susceptible, but as long as you build mostly to the north and south of your nexus, you should be fine.
|
Just tested and looked around in game.
Mineral only nat is 3k minerals per patch. You can NOT mine with more than one worker.
6 o'clock seems like plenty of space for a base.. might be an issue late game when you have a ton of gateways or what have you. If you are cautious you can still have plenty of room to build without having your buildings be in tank range, although yes, it's much harder than the other spawns.
P forge expand doesn't seem as bad in game as it does just looking at that flank. As someone mentioned, with good building placement you can still do a nice job of it. There isn't very much room between the gas and the ledge. You might even be able to block it off completely with a gateway if you're worried about lings. And with the nexus down, the gap in the front is pretty small, too. Forge + zealot should do the trick.
Although yes, even with creative building placement, flanks still = win, heh.
Edit: Also, it does look like a mutalisk, or some other kind of bird thing, in the middle (the statue).
|
This map definitely looks like it'll bring out some new play styles. Looking forward to it.
|
This map is nice, except mutalisks rape the natural expansion. You need to build manner turrets to survive :>
Only thing bothering me, is that it seems like terran might get to make too effective pushes against protoss.
But i love this map, it seems kinda awesome
|
|
|
rofl i thought it was a 2 player map never noticed the color at 6
|
Italy372 Posts
Is there a way to download it?
|
C'mon people! This "zomg Terran will be imba asdfasff" bullshit appears every time a new map is introduced. Even when Medusa was new, a lot of people were screaming about that...
Anyway, I like this map aesthetically. Hoping it will be balanced and produce interesting games.
|
as well as two destructible Refineries that open up a new path to the natural.
what? where?
|
On December 21 2008 20:55 finkelboy wrote:
Is there a way to download it?
broodwarmaps.net
|
On December 21 2008 20:55 finkelboy wrote:
Is there a way to download it?
iCCup has a version 1.1 of it already
|
|
|
I had play some games in this map and is good =D has nice places for chesse builds and also the fact than the nat has 2 entrys rlz many new thinks been done for that, how ever like just D i can't take much advantage XD
|
Whoever gets the ramp wins..
|
On December 15 2008 10:35 blabber wrote:YAY ANOTHER TWILIGHT MAP!! + Show Spoiler +
i really wish they could make another snow map D:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](/staff/OneOther/OSL.jpg)
