• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 08:37
CEST 14:37
KST 21:37
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 34518 users

[M] Divided Solution

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Normal
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-03 18:47:49
November 23 2010 20:22 GMT
#1
(4) Divided Solution
[image loading]



[image loading]
Bigger Picture
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]



Idea for the map:
The idea was to make a 4 start position map where all the start point are in the middle of the map. I was not sure if it was possible or I if would be able to get it right.
The name was something that came to mind, but has not really much to do with the map. If you got a better idea for the name, please post it!


More Pics
+ Show Spoiler +

45° View:
[image loading]


Main, Nat and the Thirds:
[image loading]


Vertical Wall with a space:
[image loading]


Vertical Wall without a space:
[image loading]


Natural walled off to the horizontal direction:
[image loading]


Main-Natural creep connection:
[image loading]



Shiny Pics
+ Show Spoiler +


[image loading]


[image loading]


[image loading]


[image loading]



Analyzer Pics
+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]

[image loading]



Distances
+ Show Spoiler +

ground:
horizontal mains: 152.3
vertical mains: 125.5
cross mains: 195.4
horizontal nats: 127.3
vertical nats: 97.9
cross nats: 171.1

cliff walk
horizontal mains: 76.8
vertical mains: 58.4
cross mains: 83.4
horizontal nats: 125.0
vertical nats: 96.0
cross nats: 157.8

air
horizontal mains: 57.0
vertical mains: 57.0
cross mains: 80.6
horizontal nats: 120.7
vertical nats: 95.4
cross nats: 153.6


Map is online on the EU-server. An older version is on the NA-server.

Details
- Four possible start positions.
- Four Watchtowers on the map - one in the middle of each side.
- One gas at the natural is siegeable from the high ground behind the rocks but no mineral patches and not the CC.
- The main mineral line is not siegeable from outside the main.
- Main and Natural Hatchery can be connected using one creep tumor.
- Tile set is Braxis Alpha.
- 18 bases (counting start positions), two of which are gold. The two possible Thirds for each player have only 7 min patches; the golds have 6; the rest 8.

Bounds
172x152 Playable
172x152 Full

older versions
+ Show Spoiler +


old (a08):
+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]



old (a07):
+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]



old (a06b):
+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]



old (a04):
+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]




Changelog
+ Show Spoiler +

a01 - internal
a02 - internal
a03 - first post on TL, first upload
a04 - lots of changes:
- added an other base for each player.
- made the mains smaller and moved it closer to the natural.
- added more watchtowers too battle the long ways a bit.
- closed off the natural vs the side lane a bit - you can't get behind the mineral line from the top.
- hole added to make wall off vs side lane easier.
- made wall off vs bottom/top lane possible.
- gold now on high ground with a ramp on the middle lane.
- added a opening in the horizontal middle lanes - blocked by destructible debris.
- cut away lots of the space at the sides of the map.
- lots of small changes & added eye candy.
a05 - never realeased but pics posted in the thread:
- main change was the East and West, adding a base and high ground.
- now only one Watchtower on the sides.
- made the map a lot smaller.
a06 & a06b:
- moved the semi-island more to the vertical middle and added a back exit/entrance, which isn't blocked (it was lvl 2 in a06 is now a06b lvl 1).
- moved the naturals more to the bottom/top end of the map and closer to the main ramp.
- added a coke point for vertical play (-> see moving of semi-island)
- small changes all over the place.
a07:
- removed the gold base at 6 and 12 o'clock.
- made the 3 and 9 o'clock bases into gold bases (only six patches).
- adjusted the 5&7 and 11&1 o'clock bases and the 6 and 12 o'clock high grounds to the changes.
- some more eye candy.
a08:
- redid the surrounding of the mains to make the mineral line unsiegeable again.
- widened the smoke path near the mains to prevent a line of sight from the high ground into the main.
- changed the lighting (comes on a bit strong in the screen shot from the editor - better in game)
1.0:
- changed position of the horizontal thirds inwards.
- lots of small clean ups
- lots of polish




Other maps I made
+ Show Spoiler +
Salt Water Wastes - needs a major overhaul and a 3rd


Please tell me what you think of the map. Feel free to publish on any other server if you like. I would be really happy if someone would play this and give me feedback.
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
November 23 2010 21:14 GMT
#2
This looks a little too big, but I'll have to play on it if I get a chance before I say that for sure. The corner 3rds are the saving grace; without them it'd just be (4) Desert Oasis. I would recommend a tower at each of 3, 6, 9, 12, or maybe just in the middle, so that you can't be accidentally backstabbed when both people move out along different routes.

This spawn setup is tough to pull off, and it looks barely playable here. One of the problems is that you have a lot of dead space in the middle to prevent tank abuse on mains, but this creates a bunch of long pathways that don't really lead anywhere useful. Notice that there's no good forward position between vertical spawns, just a chokepoint at the edge and a long alternate route through the center. Horizontal spawns is much better, but has a similar problem with positioning after 3 bases. I would think about changing those long equatorial gaps, they seem to divide the map too emphatically.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
November 23 2010 21:52 GMT
#3
Thanks for the feedback EatThePath.
The long ways are a problem I am aware of, and forgot to put in the Problems section
I was hesitant to put watchtowers near the middle as it would grant vision into the mains, at the moment.
I will think about what you said and how it can be implemented into the map.
Randomaccount#77123
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States5003 Posts
November 25 2010 00:25 GMT
#4
--- Nuked ---
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-12 21:46:00
February 12 2011 20:42 GMT
#5
Updated the map to version a04.
It's online on the EU server.

Lots of changes. Mainly another base per player, and redone 3 and 9 o'clock and more XWT all over the map. Please keep giving me feedback it really helps a lot - and might make this map good someday :D

edit: misplaced minerals at the new expos fixed - close up picture changed.
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-12 21:52:53
February 12 2011 21:50 GMT
#6
You're going in the right direction, but you still have a long way to go. You need to identify the core idea of this map and be prepared to change anything else. I believe the foundation of the map is four bases with an outside path (the reverse of most maps). To have a reasonable air distance, there is space between the bases, so this might as well be a center pathway (as you have). The problem is that the distance between naturals is quite large when you place the outwards from the mains. You have given a close 3rd and 4th, but the 4th (near the gold) is hard to take in horizontal spawns. Zerg would have a lot of trouble keeping that base against a horizontal spawns terran. The alternative is to go reeeeally far away.

Let me go over what is good so far. I like the expansions except the semi island. The rocks serve little purpose, and that base would be more interesting if you moved it from the corner to the east and west flanks. This would provide a 3rd away from your opponent in horizontal spawns, and shrink the distance to subsequent bases around the outside away from opponent. (This is like the current thirds in vertical spawns. Vertical spawns are currently the best looking positions.)

You can tuck the current 3rd closer towards the main, away from the top/bottom edge of the map.

The towers are good, but they could be placed better. They serve the role of watching your back, but they are very one-dimensional in purpose that way. Revealing part of the main should be avoided unless it's very intentional. They would improve by being more contestable and watching more than one node / intersection, or not watching every part of a given area.

This is how I would proceed if I was going to make adjustments: this really needs to be 10-15% smaller in dimension, and could probably use another neutral base or two. I would make a new file and see what it looks like to cram everything, adjust it until you can't, and then see what you've learned. Apply that to the original. You might achieve this just by drawing on paper if your eyes are good at distances.

Basically, nothing is safe from changes except the general orientation of main + natural. See what happens with experimentation and take the best results.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-02-13 16:17:15
February 13 2011 16:13 GMT
#7
@EatThePath: Thanks for the feedback! This is great! And you are right in almost all point.
I think I will keep the semi-islands for a little longer.

I didn't get much sleep last night thanks to your feedback

This is what I came up with:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]

[image loading]


The map is smaller now:
Playable: 160 x 152
Full : 160 x 152

The distances (ground) are now:
vertical mains: 125
vertical nats: 76
horizontal mains: 145.6
horizontal nats: 133.3
Cross mains: 191.5
Cross nats: 155.3

There is no room to move the mains closer together than this.
The third is already pretty cramped, and I will have to think about the gold again, maybe.

What i like about the changes is the left and right. The XWT does not see the narrow paths from the middle what gives them more purpose, seeing as they are pretty risky to take that close to the enemy main.

What i don't like is that the terrain for horizontal and vertical is now very similar, but maybe its for the best.

I will play around with this some more, before fixing all the texturing and doodads.

Again thanks for the long text EatThePath!
edit: Oh, and I cannot move the third closer to the main, cause the main mineral line will get siegeable, what isn't all that funny^^. But now it is even further away what isn't all that nice too
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
February 13 2011 21:49 GMT
#8
Ha, I'm sorry I fueled your insomnia. I also lost sleep over a map. ;D

This looks much better imo! The E/W towers and bases work quite well. It's a departure from the original layout, but I like having 3,6,9,12 bases because the midgame-lategame will have a lot of action in the middle as the players push those expos.

There are only two remaining problems and I don't think they ruin it. The size is still pretty humongous... 160x152 is quite large, there are 20 bases, and the diagonal distances are so big. Despite this, the vertical nat2nat is dangerously short.

Well, I don't see how you can do much more, you're correct that you've pinched in as much as possible. And for a big map, this looks quite playable. So that's okay.

As for the vertical distance, I suppose you can always take your natural at the labeled 3rd, which is quite a bit safer, and not too far away. It's still rough for zerg to need so many creep tumors (looks like 3), but it's better than metalopolis close positions since you at least have an option.

The semi-islands are more tolerable with this new version for some reason. I think it's because they're not mandatory. I'm not thrilled about the base there at all though, because it promotes turtling in your corner with 4 bases. If both players do that... not a very exciting game for the first 20 minutes. Then again, for the same reason it's a hedge against all-in type play, because you can be economic without extending too far, and I'm always in favor of providing choices in expansion pattern.

The aisles at the equator are my favorite part of the map now, they look quite fun in a long game. The initial textures/doodads look pretty good so far.

Btw, you're welcome for the criticism. I like to talk too much anyway.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Kujawa
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States137 Posts
February 13 2011 21:55 GMT
#9
its 4 player desert oasis but it looks cool. Mby just widen the air positions a little.
get the fuck out ball- hot_bid
SmashHammer
Profile Joined January 2011
United States148 Posts
February 13 2011 23:08 GMT
#10
I really like the unique layout. It does remind me of desert oasis a bit, but seems much more macro oriented. Adding a backdoor blocked by destructible rocks seems like it would make slower ground armies more viable. If you wanted to increase the vertical nat-to-nat distance you could remove some of the area between the XWTs and add in a larger ramp near the middle.
-->+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]
or some variation of this

TPW Mapping - theplanetaryworkshop.com
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 14 2011 12:44 GMT
#11
On February 14 2011 06:55 Kujawa wrote:
its 4 player desert oasis but it looks cool. Mby just widen the air positions a little.

I don't know how to do that without making the ground paths even longer.
And I think the meta game will have to deal with strong air play on this map no matter what I do.

@SmashHammer:
The idea is good, but it wouldn't work with the changes I posted earlier. Game play wise I think I need to be careful I don't end up with just three vertical and three horizontal lines. So I think I would rather try to move the naturals a bit more to the south/north.

@EatThePath:
As I said above moving the natural more to the south/north would be a way to lengthen the vertical distance. I could do something like this, to take care of the 4base chill hard game play:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]
- Yeay for MS Paint + Touchpad!


But I am not sure how smart that would be for the horizontal game play. I will work on this this evening - not this night! I promise myself!

Also: Keep on the long posts EatThePath! They help so much! And thanks to Kujawa & SmashHammer, every input helps a lot.
SmashHammer
Profile Joined January 2011
United States148 Posts
February 14 2011 15:45 GMT
#12
Ahh, sorry I didn't notice the updated picture. Also I think the semi-islands would be easy for Terran to take as a natural because there is nothing blocking the landing place. I would recommend moving the DRs to where a cc/hatch/nexus would be placed.
TPW Mapping - theplanetaryworkshop.com
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 14 2011 16:31 GMT
#13
@SmashHammer:
The DR are there so it would be possible to Tank drop the natural without a cliff and a possibility to stop it without Observers or your one drops, just by destroying the rocks first. But I don't think it is worth the trouble to keep it in the map. Also the drops wouldn't work with Stalkers and so on

I don't think the Terran taking a Semi-Island is that much of a problem in sc2 as it was in sc:bw.

I posted an idea above how to change the natural an the semi-isle. If I was to make the changes, it would be possible for every race to take the former semi-isle without destroy the rocks. And only good in horizontal positions, if at all.

But its a nice point and it makes the changes much more likely
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 16 2011 20:02 GMT
#14
I updated the post to the latest version of the map (a06.b).

I applied the changes I posted in my last posts.
The map is now on the EU server in the last version.
If someone would play test this I would be very happy.
As always I am grateful for any criticism.

I also did what EatThePath told me to do long a ago, and moved the semi-isles more towards the vertical center. I added a backdoor to them, which is not blocked. So one can take the expansion before destroying the rocks. Also one can battle tanks on the high ground (what expansions are now) more easily.
I am not sure what the open door to a high ground means for proxy pylons and siege tanks, but i don't think there is a spot for all that to be completely imba.
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
February 16 2011 22:51 GMT
#15
Best version yet. Of course I approve of the new side bases, hehe. Can tanks reach anything from behind the rocks? It looks like they can hit the closest geyser and possibly one or two of the mineral patches. I would try to arrange it so tanks can't hit anything. Being in range alone isn't unfair, but the tanks can always back up with all that space behind the rocks, making it unfair for shorter range units to try and fight without the rocks down, and going around is very far. Also, I'm a little worried about a terran push coming down that high ground ramp with tanks. If you could reorient that ramp so it's farther away from the natural, possibly diagonal, it would be better. It makes a choke point, which combined with highground makes a tank based push really deadly. I like the choke point it makes with the main cliff though.

This map is now one of the biggest maps I'm willing to consider as playable, despite its enormous size, and I'm curious how it would work. I would try to play some games if you sent it to me to put on NA.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
WniO
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2706 Posts
February 16 2011 23:20 GMT
#16
theres too many bases imo
SidianTheBard
Profile Joined October 2010
United States2474 Posts
February 17 2011 07:30 GMT
#17
Best version so far, it's really starting to pull together nicely. About your concerns in the first post..

The cross positions are not very well tested.

This is a concern for me too as (assuming your analyzers are updated in the OP as well) 191 distance from main to main, then 167 from nat to nat for cross positions is a very far distance. The good part is it would make it much better macro games and since the natural/thirds are still quite in the open it'll still be very fun. Any chance you could upload some replays on this map? Be fun to see a player vs player battle on this.

Too many expansions?
Yeah, quite possibly might be, If you could somehow manage to take out at most 4 expansions it'd be perfect imo, but otherwise I don't think it's that much of a problem. I'm also wondering why the 3 and 9 o'clock expansions aren't gold expansions as well? They are in the middle and would be hard to defend as well.

The Natural backdoor/high ground might proof problematic.
Is there a reason you want those destructible rocks blocking off that highground/quick third? To me if the 3rd is easier to take then it just makes the games seem much more macro oriented.

My Photoshop skills are underwhelming.
Practice makes perfect
Creator of Abyssal Reef, Ascension to Aiur, Battle on the Boardwalk, Habitation Station, Honorgrounds, IPL Darkness Falls, King's Cove, Korhal Carnage Knockout & Moonlight Madness.
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 18 2011 19:43 GMT
#18
First: Thanks again for all the great and indepth posts!

Secondly: I Updated the map. Main change: I removed the gold base at 6 and 12 o'clock and made the 3 and 9 o'clock bases golden.
I think those two bases where the ones I can take away without changing much, so I think I am right in doing so. The only thing I was afraid of is that it makes the middle S-N-path less attractive to push in the cross late game. But as the 3rd and a potential 4th or 5th are still perfectly attackable from 6 and 12 o'clock, I think it's fine. What do you guys think?

Thirdly: The high-ground next to the naturals: I would like to leave it as it is now and test it in played games before going too deep into theory over this. I considered moving the ramp to the natural to the outside of the choke. But couldn't get it to work for the following reasoning. The way it is now you have the high-ground up to the rocks as a defenders advantage. If I move the ramp this will not only get lost but also will the attacker have an high-ground even without taking down the rocks - this is unacceptable imo. If I move the rocks to the other entrance of the high-ground it is way to far away to defend even against early lings/zelots and so on - I think. And then it would open a third way into the natural really early. Same goes for removing the rocks completely.

I got a few reps where I (platinum Toss) get crushed by a diamond Zerg pretty badly. What could hint on the strong muta play on this map, but is much more likely to hint at the few hours I have actually been playing sc2 in the last weeks. I will see about uploading them.
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 22 2011 19:04 GMT
#19
I Updated the map.
Mostly fixed the mains, as the one geyser had become siegeable when I made the map smaller.
Also one could glimpse into the main from the high ground of the gold bases. I widened the paths with smoke, so this is no longer possible.

I also redid the lighting - it seems a bit strong in the screenshots from the editor - but I think it looks good in game.

Tell me what you think, or if I missed something
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
February 28 2011 18:38 GMT
#20
The map is now online in the North America server as well --> thanks!

I will stop making changes for now, and work on the visuals some more.
Please post what you think about the map.
Corak
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany187 Posts
May 03 2011 19:14 GMT
#21
Map Update. Ver. 1.0 (-> Wuhu!)
Lots of small chances and it looks much nicer now.
I tested it with two friend. We thought it played really nice.
Vertical spawns are pretty aggressive but its all good.

Tell me what you think!
Sirion
Profile Joined August 2010
131 Posts
May 08 2011 11:06 GMT
#22
I really like this map. In my opinion it has come a long way when looking at the earlier versions.

The map structure really works quite well. This outer ring of expansions, with mains more in the middle, and the horizontal and vertical spoke-like attack paths. What I especially like is how spawning positions change the play on the map, but somehow a lot still is the same:
-In horizontal or vertical positions, the way along the ring is the clear route of attack, with a tower to control vision. The spokes provide alternative paths, with longer walking distance but more secrecy. Also, this ring structure allows to expand either towards your opponent or away from him.
-In cross positions the distances become big, but close air distances keep the threat of aggression present and the game dynamic. Also, suddenly it is no longer clear from where an attack is coming, so the longer walking distance is balanced by the need to keep track of where opposing forces are positioned to not get caught out of position.
-Close air distances certainly play an important role, but by it seems not too difficult to protect main, natural and a third from air harass, as a well protected main constricts the air access to the expansions behind it a lot.
-As it is mirror symmetric and not rotational symmetric no player has an unfair advantage just through spawns, both players have identical access to expansions and attack paths.

So regarding overall map layout, it seems like a great blend of the good features of both metalopolis and desert oasis.

Regarding the finer structures of the map, I like how the natural is protecting the main, while simultaneously pointing away from the opponent regardless of spawns. Given the threat of air harass, that is an important feature (and the reason the original desert oasis failed). Also, the empty space at various parts in the middle restring cliff hopping paths are a nice touch.

I am torn on those alternative paths from third to natural in vertical spawns. On one hand, that little cliff there might provide an additional defends advantage, on the other hand an additional attack path in positions where you already have the closest walking distance might be too much. I guess it comes down whether it is more of an a defenders advantage or attackers advantage.

The way some the minerals of the thirds in horizontal positions are attackable from the vertical middle path is nice, but I do not know if that makes that expansion too vulnerable. But given how a lot of expansions are available that seems fine, if you do not like that one take a different one. It also rewards map control and awareness, in contrast to massing a big army and a-moving.

I am no terran player, so it is tough to judge the size of the main to put down a lot of production buildings without exposing them to attacks from the low ground(siege, colossus, broodlords).

Overall balance seems good, with each race having some features they like and some they do not like so much.

Regarding aesthetics, the map has nothing special going for it, it is no beautiful garden or mystic shrine, it is a derelict space station. However, I have no objects as it looks and feels a lot like that, some derelict station floating somewhere in space. Nobody cares what its former function was, now you fight over it because it gives positional advantage to whoever controls it in some bigger conflict. I like how it is easy to construct this kind of story from visuals alone.

Which brings me to my biggest point of critique: the name "Divided Solution". It evokes nothing of the story the aesthetics tell. Any other name, say "Station 426", would be better.

So in conclusion, after a post which grew much longer than I had planned, I like this map. It is fun to play on it. It gives opportunity for a lot of play styles without forcing any, creating exciting games. Some details might(or might not) need some changes, but that needs a ton of play testing to figure out, by many different players. And in the end, if my biggest complaint is the name, then it is a fine map and deserves more attention than it is currently getting. GL in MotM #5.
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
GSL Code S
09:30
Ro8 - Group A
Solar vs GuMihoLIVE!
Crank 285
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Harstem 257
ProTech74
EnDerr 64
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 18186
Rain 5245
Calm 4646
Bisu 1913
Horang2 1870
Jaedong 968
Shuttle 360
BeSt 357
Pusan 330
Last 281
[ Show more ]
Mini 208
EffOrt 200
TY 147
Soulkey 145
Light 142
Snow 141
ZerO 140
Dewaltoss 81
ggaemo 79
Hyun 67
ToSsGirL 59
hero 51
Shine 48
[sc1f]eonzerg 48
Aegong 40
PianO 35
Mong 29
Sacsri 24
JYJ23
Icarus 23
Sharp 21
Movie 20
sSak 18
Barracks 17
sorry 17
HiyA 9
zelot 9
Dota 2
qojqva1524
420jenkins527
XcaliburYe424
Fuzer 235
Counter-Strike
x6flipin704
markeloff108
edward37
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor155
Other Games
singsing2788
B2W.Neo1399
DeMusliM555
Crank 307
XBOCT276
crisheroes206
XaKoH 127
Lowko86
ZerO(Twitch)20
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Secondary Stream8508
Other Games
gamesdonequick499
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 11 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Other Games
• WagamamaTV138
Upcoming Events
Online Event
11h 24m
Replay Cast
13h 24m
GSL Code S
20h 54m
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
21h 24m
Replay Cast
1d 11h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 22h
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
2 days
SOOP
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
6 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.