• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 07:37
CET 13:37
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
Behind the Blue - Team Liquid History Book11Clem wins HomeStory Cup 289HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview13Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info7herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational14
Community News
Weekly Cups (Feb 2-8): Classic, Solar, MaxPax win2Nexon's StarCraft game could be FPS, led by UMS maker6PIG STY FESTIVAL 7.0! (19 Feb - 1 Mar)9Weekly Cups (Jan 26-Feb 1): herO, Clem, ByuN, Classic win2RSL Season 4 announced for March-April8
StarCraft 2
General
Terran Scanner Sweep How do you think the 5.0.15 balance patch (Oct 2025) for StarCraft II has affected the game? Nexon's StarCraft game could be FPS, led by UMS maker Behind the Blue - Team Liquid History Book Weekly Cups (Feb 2-8): Classic, Solar, MaxPax win
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL Season 4 announced for March-April PIG STY FESTIVAL 7.0! (19 Feb - 1 Mar) WardiTV Mondays $21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7)
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ? [A] Starcraft Sound Mod
External Content
Mutation # 512 Overclocked The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 511 Temple of Rebirth Mutation # 510 Safety Violation
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Gypsy to Korea [ASL21] Potential Map Candidates BW General Discussion Liquipedia.net NEEDS editors for Brood War
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 1 Small VOD Thread 2.0 KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
Strategy
Zealot bombing is no longer popular? Simple Questions, Simple Answers Current Meta Soma's 9 hatch build from ASL Game 2
Other Games
General Games
Battle Aces/David Kim RTS Megathread Diablo 2 thread ZeroSpace Megathread EVE Corporation Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Sex and weight loss YouTube Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Expanding Horizons…
edu.gatewayabroad
Play, Watch, Drink: Esports …
TrAiDoS
My 2025 Magic: The Gathering…
DARKING
Life Update and thoughts.
FuDDx
How do archons sleep?
8882
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1859 users

[M] (4) Corruption by monitor

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Normal
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-05 01:20:31
July 24 2011 18:11 GMT
#1
[image loading]

      Corruption by monitor

Corruption is a very experimental map, in both layout and aesthetics. It's layout features a seperated main and natural, but can still be walled on the lowground. Expanding to a third gives you the option between a single high yield gas expansion, or a 2 gas expo that is farther away.

Note: The cliff at the 1-gas third cannot be dropped.

Notably, there is a neutral creep tumor in front of the natural choke. Protoss and Terran can still wall off the lowground, but Zerg can also defend in the early game by using spine crawlers. Since the creep tumor is visible, you can avoid a spine crawler rush by killing it in 55 seconds using a harvester.

[image loading]

The map is set in the Protoss homeworld of Auir, but the Zerg swarm is slowly taking it over. You'll find 'fake' creep spread throughout the map- coupled with Zerg eggs and intestines. This does not affect gameplay (but can be confusing at first)- only gives the map a unique setting.

[image loading]

+ Show Spoiler [Natural Wall-off] +
[image loading]


+ Show Spoiler [Natural and Third] +
[image loading]


+ Show Spoiler [Third] +
[image loading]


+ Show Spoiler [Center] +
[image loading]

  • # of Players: 4 (meant for 1v1)
  • XelNaga Towers: 4
  • Expansions total: 16
  • Gold Expansions: None
  • Map Bounds: 138x138


Changelog:
1.0
-Released
1.1
-Supply Depot added at the bottom of the main ramp
1.2
-Natural mineral formation adjusted to be out of tank range
2.0
-One gas @ natural moved to other side
-Creep tumor now visible, hp = 200 (60 seconds to kill w/ probe)
-Brighter lighting, now Bel'Shir
-Loading Screen added
-Map bounds increased to 138x138
2.1
-Rotated 4th minerals
-3rd cliff cannot be dropped
-moved main minerals closer to ramp

The map is currently published on NA under "Corruption by monitor".
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Ragoo
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany2773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 18:21:30
July 24 2011 18:17 GMT
#2
Oh yeah, I love to see that you use your solid 4player rotational map skills for something truly innovative now! I'd looove to see how this plays out in pro matches. <3

edit: Aesthetics are really interesting. I didn't ever think about using the Haven Grass Rocky like that (it's Haven Grass Rocky, right?!^^).
edit2: I want to emphasize again that I instantly love every map which truly brings something new and I really want to see how this natural setup will work out in your map or LSPrime's map
Member of TPW mapmaking team/// twitter.com/Ragoo_ /// "goody represents border between explainable reason and supernatural" Cloud
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 18:21:20
July 24 2011 18:20 GMT
#3
On July 25 2011 03:17 Ragoo wrote:
Oh yeah, I love to see that you use your solid 4player rotation map skills for something truly innovative now! I'd looove to see how this plays out in pro matches. <3

edit: Aesthetics are really interesting. I didn't ever think about using the Haven Grass Rocky like that (it's Haven Grass Rocky, right?!^^).


Thanks!

I'm going to add a lowered supply depot at the bottom of the main ramp to prevent walloffs/bunker rushes.

[edit] Oh yeah, I'll post an image of the aesthetics.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
IronManSC
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States2119 Posts
July 24 2011 18:25 GMT
#4
Natural is wicked easy to defend, dont you think?
SC2 Mapmaker || twitter: @ironmansc || Ohana & Mech Depot || 3x TLMC finalist || www.twitch.tv/sc2mapstream
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 18:31:50
July 24 2011 18:31 GMT
#5
On July 25 2011 03:25 IronManSC wrote:
Natural is wicked easy to defend, dont you think?


It's definitely very easy to defend. It's not too easy because-

Zerg can be aggressive using the creep tumor. It allows spine crawler aggression, and a lot of timing attacks using the speed boost (like Hydras). Zerg can also do drops/nydus very effectively because there's a lot of space to do it, and the expansions are seperated.

Terran can be aggressive too. Drops will be particularly easy with the separated expansions, and there's lots of space for it. Siege tanks can also hit the natural gas and part of the mineral line (although I'm trying to fix this).

Protoss can use forcefields very easily to be aggressive, because of the small chokes and two ramps. They can also do drops (if they ever do...) very effectively. Colossi and blink stalker armies will be extremely good at breaking 2base turtling too.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Ragoo
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany2773 Posts
July 24 2011 18:39 GMT
#6
On July 25 2011 03:31 monitor wrote:
[...]Siege tanks can also hit the natural gas and part of the mineral line (although I'm trying to fix this).


Ah good to hear. I was just about to point that out, it looks very imba, like even worse than when you spawn clockwise to your opponent on Tal'Darim in TvZ and can easily siege on his nat.
Member of TPW mapmaking team/// twitter.com/Ragoo_ /// "goody represents border between explainable reason and supernatural" Cloud
Serashin
Profile Joined November 2010
235 Posts
July 24 2011 18:59 GMT
#7
You sir just created the ULTIMATE PvZ 2 base Turtle map .
Thank you very much !
I have already a merely unbeatable strategy in mind other then that you problably know yourself that this was a unreasonable to use that mapsize for a 4 player map it clearly is shown reflected on your layout / the way ressources are placed i dont see this map ever getting played,
except maybe for a TvT showmatch/grudgematch just for the lolz.
I also feel like there is somewhat missing a clear 3rd collor and a half clear 4th collor in the design coppeled with dodats that support that design flow wich is extremly hard to archieve on a 4 player roational symetry map. it is way easier on maps like shakuras platueau where the theme can flow easier over the map.
Such a layout main / natural high/low ground is sadly against game balance maths.

I feel like the only way of making such a layout viable is to add backdoorrocks at the highground natural on equal cliff level i see it still to easy to defend if it were a lower ground cliff level and a higher cliff level seems imbalanced depending on some sitations aswell.

A big error for a 4 player map that is not Tal´darim altar or Terminus re wich are in my view already unreasonable maps is to provide 4 Xel Naga Towers on it especialy with such little size 150x150 seems better to work.

I honestly dont have made up my mind what exactly is the best number of towers for a medium/small sized rotational symertry map. But i strongly tend to 3 towers wich is very hard to support with athestics/dodats/terrain design but i tend to having them spread out in such a way that their circles nearly connect placed at the edge of the middle 4 towers are just not something you can constantly fight over or watch over.

To also not see a single drop of water makes me:
1. thirsty
2.wonder how there is so much gras / plants and zero trees:O

A thing you should never add on a map is race imbalance wich you just did with that creep , i think your mind was not correctly set how to make they layout in such way that from main to natural 2-3 creep tumors are needed to connect the creep.

The map truly is an experiment wich requires allot of thoughts and time to watch over it ,
use this advice to your own risk !
"rest of policy copy paste stuff to not blame someone"
There are to many targets , and i smile everytime they try to defend and thinking they are smart.
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 19:10:54
July 24 2011 19:07 GMT
#8
On July 25 2011 03:59 Serashin wrote:
You sir just created the ULTIMATE PvZ 2 base Turtle map .
Thank you very much !
I have already a merely unbeatable strategy in mind other then that you problably know yourself that this was a unreasonable to use that mapsize for a 4 player map it clearly is shown reflected on your layout / the way ressources are placed i dont see this map ever getting played,
except maybe for a TvT showmatch/grudgematch just for the lolz.
I also feel like there is somewhat missing a clear 3rd collor and a half clear 4th collor in the design coppeled with dodats that support that design flow wich is extremly hard to archieve on a 4 player roational symetry map. it is way easier on maps like shakuras platueau where the theme can flow easier over the map.
Such a layout main / natural high/low ground is sadly against game balance maths.

I feel like the only way of making such a layout viable is to add backdoorrocks at the highground natural on equal cliff level i see it still to easy to defend if it were a lower ground cliff level and a higher cliff level seems imbalanced depending on some sitations aswell.

A big error for a 4 player map that is not Tal´darim altar or Terminus re wich are in my view already unreasonable maps is to provide 4 Xel Naga Towers on it especialy with such little size 150x150 seems better to work.

I honestly dont have made up my mind what exactly is the best number of towers for a medium/small sized rotational symertry map. But i strongly tend to 3 towers wich is very hard to support with athestics/dodats/terrain design but i tend to having them spread out in such a way that their circles nearly connect placed at the edge of the middle 4 towers are just not something you can constantly fight over or watch over.

To also not see a single drop of water makes me:
1. thirsty
2.wonder how there is so much gras / plants and zero trees:O

A thing you should never add on a map is race imbalance wich you just did with that creep , i think your mind was not correctly set how to make they layout in such way that from main to natural 2-3 creep tumors are needed to connect the creep.

The map truly is an experiment wich requires allot of thoughts and time to watch over it ,
use this advice to your own risk !
"rest of policy copy paste stuff to not blame someone"


Wow, this is confusing. Uhhh....

I agree the natural is pretty easy to defend, but not too bad. I'd be glad to beat your 'unbeatable' strategy- add me on NA @ Pawp.693.

The towers have a radius of 16 instead of 22, so this really isn't an issue. They offer small vision for aggression into the 3rd, but don't see up to the natural (making blink ridiculous).

There is water in the middle... but that is the only wasted space in the map (and its not wasted, because it needs to choke up the map). So there isn't any way to add more water, since there is no wasted space. Oh and, there are a lot of trees and a lot of grass. Not sure what you mean?

The creep tumor absolutely needs to be there to allow Zerg to fast expand vs. Protoss and Terran. Otherwise it would far too hard to secure the natural compared to the other races.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Serashin
Profile Joined November 2010
235 Posts
July 24 2011 19:42 GMT
#9
I smile for having wasted my time to give advice on lazy work.

Fact map as it is is not ready for being able to play im pretty sure you can create a high/ lowground layout wich allows the usual zerg invest into creep tumor himself without creating imbalance.

yes the trees i noticed after the pic loaded after 2 minutes thats how cute my internet is atm , wich wont allow me to demonstrate my strategy on this map and it is not 2 base the entire game but 2 base to such a point that every cost effective trade is extremly hard / basicly impossible to achieve.

It works prety much the same on Shakuras plateau sadly it doesnt work against terran cause they have nukes wich you cant prevent with my strategy .
I also dont have a NA acc and i get with my current connection droped from game and make oppenent lag.

The radius is also something what you should never change of a xel naga tower its like a ressource wich shouldnt get cut , and you say yourself that you were forced to do this but all comes down to your initial map size choice .
wich is why this map is and will stay unplayable for competive matches forever however basic ideas can be used for a playable map.

also its hard to recognize the water except for the belshir plant in it given reflection light effects used with it.
also this adivice with high ground natural lowground space with making backdoorrocks is ment as general point for such a main / natural design you need more space to attack such expansions.
just look how it is at XNC there are used sight blockers now make a picture in your mind with rocks there and you are safe early against helion run / by harass cause those dudes need long to melt a rock o.O

User was warned for this post
There are to many targets , and i smile everytime they try to defend and thinking they are smart.
AaronJ
Profile Joined January 2011
United States90 Posts
July 24 2011 19:53 GMT
#10
Great map. My only worry is that siege tanks on the cliff behind the third could completely contain a zerg or toss and would be too hard to defend but I don't know the range of tanks on that cliff.
Violence is never an option, unless he started it.
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 22:12:13
July 24 2011 20:06 GMT
#11
On July 25 2011 04:42 Serashin wrote:
I smile for having wasted my time to give advice on lazy work.

Fact map as it is is not ready for being able to play


It's been played quite a bit, and its played out pretty solid. Unusual, but solid. And yes, games got off of 2 bases.

im pretty sure you can create a high/ lowground layout wich allows the usual zerg invest into creep tumor himself without creating imbalance.

There is no imbalance with the neutral creep tumor. Protoss and Terran can still wall off. Zerg can just use early defense, and can be aggressive vs. a turtling 2base opponent.

yes the trees i noticed after the pic loaded after 2 minutes thats how cute my internet is atm , wich wont allow me to demonstrate my strategy on this mapexpansions

Uhhh... how do the trees affect the strategy?

and it is not 2 base the entire game but 2 base to such a point that every cost effective trade is extremly hard / basicly impossible to achieve.

Okay... so just a 2 base timing into expand? Please give more details, otherwise there really is no point in giving feedback.

It works prety much the same on Shakuras plateau sadly it doesnt work against terran cause they have nukes wich you cant prevent with my strategy .

Crazy! Still have no idea what you're talking about, but would like to hear it if nukes counter it.

I also dont have a NA acc and i get with my current connection droped from game and make oppenent lag.

Oh okay... I can use the iCCup EU account, does that work for you?

The radius is also something what you should never change of a xel naga tower its like a ressource wich shouldnt get cut

No it isn't. Towers often have their radius changed, and there is every reason to fiddle with it. If you left it at 22, every one would be the same- smaller allows more on the map, and makes them less of "oh I'm too lazy to scout... I'll just take the tower".

and you say yourself that you were forced to do this but all comes down to your initial map size choice .

If the map was bigger, it would completely screw up distances. Right now there exactly how I want them to be (# of tumors to expansions, tank range, pylon warp ins, open space for surrounds, choke for FF's, wall offs, etc.). The tower range is decreased to allow 4 towers.

wich is why this map is and will stay unplayable for competive matches forever however basic ideas can be used for a playable map.

Mmm... I see no reasons why it is unplayable.

also its hard to recognize the water except for the belshir plant in it given reflection light effects used with it.

I hadn't intended for the water to be seen from the overview. It's completely visible in-game.

also this adivice with high ground natural lowground space with making backdoorrocks is ment as general point for such a main / natural design

I absolutely cannot add a backdoor to this map, because that would create massive positional imbalances for the counterclockwise player to attack into, way worse than Blistering Sands.

you need more space to attack such expansions.

The natural? Right now the point of it is to be pretty safe.

just look how it is at XNC there are used sight blockers now make a picture in your mind with rocks there and you are safe early against helion run / by harass cause those dudes need long to melt a rock o.O

Runby harass is not what I'm worried abut at all. It's aggression and timing pushes that will kill any attempt to macro, because static defense cannot cover both entrances. It would also make the distance for aggression ridiculously short for the counterclockwise player (positionally imbalanced). Your idea has the same problem Blistering Sands does.



I added in my comments beneath each section (your writing is red). Pleeeeaaase use more examples that I can figure out what you mean (ie Zerg won't be able to do X because of X).
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Ragoo
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany2773 Posts
July 24 2011 20:11 GMT
#12
I don't think safe naturals are a problem at all, safe 3+ base is much more problematic the way this game currently plays out. As long as you Zerg can easily take more bases than a turtling P/T it's fine, and I think that's the case for this map.

Btw sorry for being a bit off topic, but which maps use altered watchtower vision? I also thought nobody did this so far :O
Member of TPW mapmaking team/// twitter.com/Ragoo_ /// "goody represents border between explainable reason and supernatural" Cloud
AaronJ
Profile Joined January 2011
United States90 Posts
July 24 2011 22:05 GMT
#13
On July 25 2011 05:06 monitor wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 04:42 Serashin wrote:
I smile for having wasted my time to give advice on lazy work.

Fact map as it is is not ready for being able to play


It's been played quite a bit, and its played out pretty solid. Unusual, but solid. And yes, games got off of 2 bases.

im pretty sure you can create a high/ lowground layout wich allows the usual zerg invest into creep tumor himself without creating imbalance.

There is no imbalance with the neutral creep tumor. Protoss and Terran can still wall off. Zerg can just use early defense, and can be aggressive vs. a turtling 2base opponent.

yes the trees i noticed after the pic loaded after 2 minutes thats how cute my internet is atm , wich wont allow me to demonstrate my strategy on this mapexpansions

Uhhh... how do the trees affect the strategy?

and it is not 2 base the entire game but 2 base to such a point that every cost effective trade is extremly hard / basicly impossible to achieve.

Okay... so just a 2 base timing into expand? Please give more details, otherwise there really is no point in giving feedback.

It works prety much the same on Shakuras plateau sadly it doesnt work against terran cause they have nukes wich you cant prevent with my strategy .

Crazy! Still have no idea what you're talking about, but would like to hear it if nukes counter it.

I also dont have a NA acc and i get with my current connection droped from game and make oppenent lag.

Oh okay... I can use the iCCup EU account, does that work for you?

The radius is also something what you should never change of a xel naga tower its like a ressource wich shouldnt get cut

No it isn't. Towers often have their radius changed, and there is every reason to fiddle with it. If you left it at 22, every one would be the same- smaller allows more on the map, and makes them less of "oh I'm too lazy to scout... I'll just take the tower".

and you say yourself that you were forced to do this but all comes down to your initial map size choice .

If the map was bigger, it would completely screw up distances. Right now there exactly how I want them to be (# of tumors to expansions, tank range, pylon warp ins, open space for surrounds, choke for FF's, wall offs, etc.). The tower range is decreased to allow 4 towers.

wich is why this map is and will stay unplayable for competive matches forever however basic ideas can be used for a playable map.

Mmm... I see no reasons why it is unplayable.

also its hard to recognize the water except for the belshir plant in it given reflection light effects used with it.

I hadn't intended for the water to be seen from the overview. It's completely visible in-game.

also this adivice with high ground natural lowground space with making backdoorrocks is ment as general point for such a main / natural design

I absolutely cannot add a backdoor to this map, because that would create massive positional imbalances for the counterclockwise player to attack into, way worse than Blistering Sands.

you need more space to attack such expansions.

The natural? Right now the point of it is to be pretty safe.

just look how it is at XNC there are used sight blockers now make a picture in your mind with rocks there and you are safe early against helion run / by harass cause those dudes need long to melt a rock o.O

Runny harass us not what I'm worried abut at all. It's aggression and timing pushes that will kill any attempt to macro, because static defense cannot cover both entrances. It would also make the distance for aggression ridiculously short for the counterclockwise player (positionally imbalanced). Your idea has the same problem Blistering Sands does.



I added in my comments beneath each section (your writing is red). Pleeeeaaase use more examples that I can figure out what you mean (ie Zerg won't be able to do X because of X).

HAHA way to show that dumb troll. He actually thinks back doors are good. Good work on the map.
Violence is never an option, unless he started it.
neobowman
Profile Blog Joined March 2008
Canada3324 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 22:11:39
July 24 2011 22:11 GMT
#14
Oh, by the way, forgot to mention. It's impossible for Protoss to Forge FE against Zerg on this map because of the creep. Two spine crawlers and the front buildings are gone. A few more and the protoss has to put up mass cannons to defend against a possible all-in.
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 22:26:13
July 24 2011 22:14 GMT
#15
On July 25 2011 07:11 neobowman wrote:
Oh, by the way, forgot to mention. It's impossible for Protoss to Forge FE against Zerg on this map because of the creep. Two spine crawlers and the front buildings are gone. A few more and the protoss has to put up mass cannons to defend against a possible all-in.


Yeah good point. I had wanted to reduce the radius of the creep tumor and move it closer so at a cannon could detect & shoot it. I'll work on it when I get back in a week.

[edit] Can't Protoss put the cannon in front? And one in the back if they risk losing it to ling/roach.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
prodiG
Profile Blog Joined January 2010
Canada2016 Posts
July 24 2011 23:02 GMT
#16
I absolutely love the amount of creativity in this map.
ESV Mapmaking Team || http://twitter.com/prodiGsc || Real talk, I don't have time to sugar-coat it for you sir
greggy
Profile Joined October 2010
United Kingdom1483 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-24 23:35:35
July 24 2011 23:33 GMT
#17
Note: I haven't actually played the map. If you could publish it on EU I'd definitely take a look at it.


On July 25 2011 07:14 monitor wrote:
[edit] Can't Protoss put the cannon in front? And one in the back if they risk losing it to ling/roach.


Well no, because it will then get killed. Having to put a cannon down to remove a neutral imbalance isn't good. Moreover, from the SS you posted it seems like the cannon is a part of the wall-off, which isn't ideal either. It's also skewed to one side so I suspect roaches might be able to kill your forge without being shot at.

The map looks pretty, but it seems quite small. Especially at the third (the 1gas one), if I put down a nexus and a few pylons it looks like it could feel cramped. Rush distances seem rather short. If you could post an analyser pic to disprove that it'd be awesome.

Lastly, and this is a general problem of high-ground naturals, if you lose control of the natural (eg PvT vs a 2rax pressure or 3rax allin, you have to let your nexus tank for a bit more often than not), that's it, you lose it. If opponent's forces get up that ramp, the natural is gone. I can't go up because I'll get whooped, so I have to lose the nexus.

Edit: I assume that cliff above the 1gas third isn't droppable. Because that'd be unpleasant to deal with.

These are my thoughts, but I am a nub so pardon if they're incorrect etc.
iGrok
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5142 Posts
July 25 2011 00:02 GMT
#18
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.
MOTM | Stim.tv | TL Mafia | Fantasy Fighting! | SNSD
Randomaccount#77123
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States5003 Posts
July 25 2011 02:07 GMT
#19
--- Nuked ---
neobowman
Profile Blog Joined March 2008
Canada3324 Posts
July 25 2011 02:28 GMT
#20
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.

I think that's the best solution
Bashnek
Profile Joined May 2011
Australia895 Posts
July 25 2011 02:37 GMT
#21
i like the map, but it looks like it would be REALLY hard for zerg to defend early-base air attacks (maybe voids/pheonix sorta stuff) in both bases.
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕人\
AFKPuezo
Profile Joined August 2010
183 Posts
July 25 2011 02:49 GMT
#22
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


What if it started the game cloaked, and became uncloacked at some appropriate time? Similar to the exploding tower on xelnaga fortress.
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
July 25 2011 02:50 GMT
#23
On July 25 2011 11:28 neobowman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.

I think that's the best solution


You can use the data editor to make a duplicate creep tumor unit and change its stats to solve the problem. That way you won't affect normal zergie mechanics and you don't have to overhaul all your spacing. I think you could reduce the creep radius so spines can't hit the front of the wall, or you could make it uncloaked but give it extra health so it won't die to workers without that being a significant cost.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
July 25 2011 02:52 GMT
#24
On July 25 2011 11:49 Cold Warpgates wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


What if it started the game cloaked, and became uncloacked at some appropriate time? Similar to the exploding tower on xelnaga fortress.


The problem is that the sunken rush will begin as soon as the pool finishes. If you make it uncloak at that time to mitigate the rush timing, you might as well just leave it uncloaked from the beginning.

Well, hm. If you managed to kill off the tumor and left the spines there bleeding... lol this is kind of too much ornate timing.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
AFKPuezo
Profile Joined August 2010
183 Posts
July 25 2011 03:18 GMT
#25
On July 25 2011 11:52 EatThePath wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 11:49 Cold Warpgates wrote:
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


What if it started the game cloaked, and became uncloacked at some appropriate time? Similar to the exploding tower on xelnaga fortress.


The problem is that the sunken rush will begin as soon as the pool finishes. If you make it uncloak at that time to mitigate the rush timing, you might as well just leave it uncloaked from the beginning.

Well, hm. If you managed to kill off the tumor and left the spines there bleeding... lol this is kind of too much ornate timing.


Could use a combination of the de-cloak and extra-health ideas. Wouldnt completely kill the idea of a spine rush, but not make it op either.

That's the idea, anyway >_>
sTYleZerG-eX
Profile Joined January 2010
Mexico473 Posts
July 25 2011 16:19 GMT
#26
Is that neutral creep? and whats that purple stuff ? Im not sure but I like it!
10%
TibblesEvilCat
Profile Joined March 2010
United Kingdom766 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-25 18:23:09
July 25 2011 17:06 GMT
#27
map looks cramped to be honest, got any ingame pictures?
.
Live Fast Die Young :D
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-07-31 21:15:44
July 31 2011 21:13 GMT
#28
On July 25 2011 12:18 Cold Warpgates wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 11:52 EatThePath wrote:
On July 25 2011 11:49 Cold Warpgates wrote:
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


What if it started the game cloaked, and became uncloacked at some appropriate time? Similar to the exploding tower on xelnaga fortress.


The problem is that the sunken rush will begin as soon as the pool finishes. If you make it uncloak at that time to mitigate the rush timing, you might as well just leave it uncloaked from the beginning.

Well, hm. If you managed to kill off the tumor and left the spines there bleeding... lol this is kind of too much ornate timing.


Could use a combination of the de-cloak and extra-health ideas. Wouldnt completely kill the idea of a spine rush, but not make it op either.

That's the idea, anyway >_>


If it was uncloaked, it would be pretty much unusable for Zerg, because you could just run up with probe and kill it. Maybe adding some extra health (so its 7-8 probe hits) and making it uncloaked (like you say) would allow Protoss to FE but still give Zerg an option for early spines.

On July 26 2011 01:19 sTYleZerG-eX wrote:
Is that neutral creep? and whats that purple stuff ? Im not sure but I like it!


The creep outside the natural is neutral, yes. The purple is 'fake' creep, just to look like the Auir home-world is being taken over.

On July 26 2011 02:06 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
map looks cramped to be honest, got any ingame pictures?
.


The pictures in the OP are a bit higher than in-game, but they're pretty close. I'll try to get in-game pictures and upload it on EU soon.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
FlaShFTW
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
United States10294 Posts
July 31 2011 21:31 GMT
#29
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.

I agree with this. This makes it so much better, because its a bit unfair in some regard. It's like either wasting a mule early game, or forcing you to get a turret (can the turret even see the tumor?) or waiting for a raven, if you are terran. Eh... not too unfair, but still agree with the make it uncloaked.
Writer#1 KT and FlaSh Fanboy || Woo Jung Ho Never Forget || Teamliquid Political Decision Desk
TL+ Member
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
August 03 2011 05:11 GMT
#30
The OP has been updated:

-Natural mineral line out of range from siege tanks

I'm struggling to figure out how to make only the neutral creep tumors burrowed- I've tried making a new unit, but can't find the setting for de-cloaked. If you know how to do it, please let me know in this thread or PM!
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Ragoo
Profile Joined March 2010
Germany2773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 10:14:35
August 03 2011 10:13 GMT
#31
here is what I did:

Go to the data editor-> data type: unit -> search for creep tumor -> duplicate Creep Tumor (Burrowed) (with all the values it has and afterwards call it something other than Creep Tumor Copy of course )

Then you click on the newly copied creep tumor and on the right window go to Unit -> flags and uncheck "cloaked"

Now for some reason the model is not copied correctly when you do this, so you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Creep Tumor Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Buildings-Zerg-Creep Tumor-Creep Tumor.m3

You have to do the same for Creep Tumor Death and Portrait - Overlord
+ Show Spoiler [For Creep Tumor Death] +

you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Creep Tumor Death Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Buildings-Zerg-Creep Tumor Death-CreepTumorDeath.m3

+ Show Spoiler [for the Portrait - Overlord] +

you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Portrait - Overlord Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Portraits-Zerg-OverlordPortrait-OverlordPortrait.m3 (but maybe you could change it to some other cool Zerg portrait from the campaign or something )


Then maybe save the map and reload it if you can't place the new creep tumor at first.

Now everything should work as intended

I think you should give it more HP tho, right now it's only 11 hits and 17 ingame seconds for a worker, time you can always spare.
Member of TPW mapmaking team/// twitter.com/Ragoo_ /// "goody represents border between explainable reason and supernatural" Cloud
mbr
Profile Joined July 2011
20 Posts
August 03 2011 11:11 GMT
#32
Reminds me a lot of Colosseum in the way the natural is laid out and the creep choke. Very cool!
WniO
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States2706 Posts
August 03 2011 14:53 GMT
#33
this has an interesting look, but it might be to dark?
Porkz
Profile Joined December 2010
Denmark1027 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-03 15:07:43
August 03 2011 15:05 GMT
#34
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


Couldn't one simply raise HP or Armor on it to counteract this?

Anyhow, Looks like a really cool map - Good Job ;D
Great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
August 03 2011 16:29 GMT
#35
On August 03 2011 19:13 Ragoo wrote:
here is what I did:

Go to the data editor-> data type: unit -> search for creep tumor -> duplicate Creep Tumor (Burrowed) (with all the values it has and afterwards call it something other than Creep Tumor Copy of course )

Then you click on the newly copied creep tumor and on the right window go to Unit -> flags and uncheck "cloaked"

Now for some reason the model is not copied correctly when you do this, so you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Creep Tumor Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Buildings-Zerg-Creep Tumor-Creep Tumor.m3

You have to do the same for Creep Tumor Death and Portrait - Overlord
+ Show Spoiler [For Creep Tumor Death] +

you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Creep Tumor Death Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Buildings-Zerg-Creep Tumor Death-CreepTumorDeath.m3

+ Show Spoiler [for the Portrait - Overlord] +

you have to click on the new creep tumor again and go down to Models: "Portrait - Overlord Copy" -> on the right go to Model -> Browse... -> Assets-Portraits-Zerg-OverlordPortrait-OverlordPortrait.m3 (but maybe you could change it to some other cool Zerg portrait from the campaign or something )


Then maybe save the map and reload it if you can't place the new creep tumor at first.

Now everything should work as intended

I think you should give it more HP tho, right now it's only 11 hits and 17 ingame seconds for a worker, time you can always spare.


Wow, awesome! I'll work on it ASAP. Thanks!

On August 04 2011 00:05 Porkz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2011 11:07 Barrin wrote:
On July 25 2011 09:02 iGrok wrote:
Idea: Make the creep tumor uncloaked.

You would be able to use one of your earliest probes to kill the creep tumor (4 or 5 hits, right?) and the creep would be almost gone by the time your forge was finished? Maybe? I guess that's like a 30-50 mineral investment, but potentially worth it.


Couldn't one simply raise HP or Armor on it to counteract this?

Anyhow, Looks like a really cool map - Good Job ;D


Thanks! I plan to raise the health to 200 so it would take 60 seconds to kill.

On August 03 2011 23:53 WniO wrote:
this has an interesting look, but it might be to dark?


I'll increase the brightness a little bit, thanks for pointing that out! I've been thinking the same for a while too.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
August 03 2011 16:42 GMT
#36
The new natural layout is wonky. It's a little unorthodox to have the geysers create a chokepoint above the ramp chokepoint. But I like it! I can imagine interesting micro there.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
August 03 2011 16:48 GMT
#37
On August 04 2011 01:42 EatThePath wrote:
The new natural layout is wonky. It's a little unorthodox to have the geysers create a chokepoint above the ramp chokepoint. But I like it! I can imagine interesting micro there.


Lol yeah. I'm trying to figure out how else to do it, but right now that's the only way I can do it to prevent tanks from sieging the mineral line. If I put the gas on the other side, it's vulnerable to tanks. If I put it next to the cliff, it can be seiged from outside the natural choke. I'll try to adjust it to make it interfere with the path the least- right now it can be walled with 2 pylons.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
August 03 2011 17:13 GMT
#38
On August 04 2011 01:48 monitor wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 04 2011 01:42 EatThePath wrote:
The new natural layout is wonky. It's a little unorthodox to have the geysers create a chokepoint above the ramp chokepoint. But I like it! I can imagine interesting micro there.


Lol yeah. I'm trying to figure out how else to do it, but right now that's the only way I can do it to prevent tanks from sieging the mineral line. If I put the gas on the other side, it's vulnerable to tanks. If I put it next to the cliff, it can be seiged from outside the natural choke. I'll try to adjust it to make it interfere with the path the least- right now it can be walled with 2 pylons.


That might be a problem for cannoning a hatch first zerg... =\

What if you put one geyser on the far side so that only one gas can be sieged? I think that would be fair.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Fearlezz
Profile Joined April 2010
Croatia176 Posts
August 03 2011 17:30 GMT
#39
Any chance you can get this on EU too? Love the creativity, wish more mappers would try new stuff like you do!
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-08-04 01:14:19
August 03 2011 17:37 GMT
#40
Alright I updated the OP information+picture and published the map as "Corruption by monitor" on NA.

-One gas @ natural moved to other side
-Creep tumor now visible, hp = 200 (60 seconds to kill w/ probe)
-Brighter lighting, now Bel'Shir
-Loading Screen added
-Map bounds increased to 138x138

[edit] Current tank shots into natural: http://i.imgur.com/WbeCp.jpg

On August 04 2011 02:30 Fearlezz wrote:
Any chance you can get this on EU too? Love the creativity, wish more mappers would try new stuff like you do!


I don't currently have the EU client downloaded. I'll see if somebody can publish it though. Thanks for showing the interest! I'll let you know if I get it published on EU.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
August 05 2011 00:52 GMT
#41
OP updated with new info and picture:

2.1
-Rotated 4th minerals
-3rd cliff cannot be dropped

Published on NA as "Corruption by monitor" if you want to play. Let me know what you think!
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Soluhwin
Profile Joined October 2010
United States1287 Posts
August 05 2011 01:18 GMT
#42
It still says 3rd cliff can be dropped in the second paragraph.
I put the sexy in dyslexia.
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2408 Posts
August 05 2011 01:20 GMT
#43
On August 05 2011 10:18 Soluhwin wrote:
It still says 3rd cliff can be dropped in the second paragraph.


Oops! Thanks for pointing it out, fixed.
https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Monitor
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
LiuLi Cup
11:00
Group A
Reynor vs Creator
Maru vs Lambo
RotterdaM1003
TKL 218
IndyStarCraft 200
Rex166
IntoTheiNu 29
Liquipedia
Sparkling Tuna Cup
10:00
Weekly #118
Classic vs ShoWTimELIVE!
CranKy Ducklings97
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 985
TKL 247
IndyStarCraft 217
Rex 166
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 8799
Sea 4000
Bisu 1533
Horang2 1461
Jaedong 719
BeSt 630
Hyuk 596
Larva 439
Stork 415
actioN 372
[ Show more ]
GuemChi 331
firebathero 247
Mini 241
Light 232
EffOrt 193
Soma 179
Snow 149
ggaemo 98
Soulkey 98
hero 81
Pusan 79
Mong 76
Sharp 71
Rush 65
Sea.KH 64
PianO 59
Aegong 47
JYJ 44
Barracks 39
Shinee 34
JulyZerg 31
ToSsGirL 30
Shuttle 30
Killer 30
Free 29
sorry 29
Movie 28
Shine 22
910 19
Hm[arnc] 19
scan(afreeca) 18
soO 18
GoRush 17
HiyA 13
ajuk12(nOOB) 12
Terrorterran 11
Sacsri 7
Counter-Strike
olofmeister1714
shoxiejesuss1517
zeus1394
x6flipin758
byalli344
edward99
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King66
Other Games
Liquid`RaSZi1076
B2W.Neo683
crisheroes208
Fuzer 182
KnowMe162
Pyrionflax146
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick343
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 27
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 12
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota256
Upcoming Events
PiGosaur Monday
12h 23m
Replay Cast
20h 23m
LiuLi Cup
22h 23m
Clem vs Rogue
SHIN vs Cyan
Replay Cast
1d 11h
The PondCast
1d 21h
KCM Race Survival
1d 21h
LiuLi Cup
1d 22h
Scarlett vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs herO
Replay Cast
2 days
Online Event
2 days
LiuLi Cup
2 days
Serral vs Zoun
Cure vs Classic
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
LiuLi Cup
3 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
LiuLi Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
LiuLi Cup
5 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Monday Night Weeklies
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
WardiTV Winter Champion…
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-02-09
Rongyi Cup S3
Underdog Cup #3

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
LiuLi Cup: 2025 Grand Finals
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual
eXTREMESLAND 2025
SL Budapest Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S1: W8
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Bellum Gens Elite Stara Zagora 2026
RSL Revival: Season 4
WardiTV Winter 2026
CCT Season 3 Global Finals
FISSURE Playground #3
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League Season 23
ESL Pro League Season 23
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
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 © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.