|
(2v2) Matadorv1.2 Made by: Gfire Published on: AM
Allies begin separated on different sides of the map, acting almost like two separate 1v1s until the rocks are destroyed or air units are involved. This is the map's concept.
Aesthetics are rough at this time, and doodads are few, but I think it looks decent enough as is to publish.
I don't know too much about 2v2 maps so I'm hoping to get some feedback and discuss some ideas. This map might not play too well since the allies expand in opposite directions, but I don't really know.
Note: The islands are one level higher than the nearby terrain.
+ Show Spoiler [analyzer] +
+ Show Spoiler [changelog] + 1.0-release 1.1-Fixed an issue where some doodads were affecting pathing on a higher cliff level. Adjusted the middle to allow easier movement from the center to one of the sides. 1.2-Added rocks to the base between the allies so a Terran cannot float there early on. Removed places where reapers could move from one side to the other before destroying rocks.
|
I really like the concept here. One of the things I hate about 2v2s, or team games in general, is you get those 2v1 situations during early aggression. Thus, skill really has zero effect on who wins or loses. In this case however, early aggression cannot be done together, making it much easier to deal with, and making room for your skill to shine. Also, the fact that it has a ton of bases makes me very, very happy. I hate team maps that only let one person take a third. Your map makes room for nice macro team games.
With that said, I overall really like the map. Allows competitive play to take place more so than with the current 2v2 ladder maps.
|
Oh wow, yeah. Brilliant concept. At first I raised an eyebrow at how allies couldn't support each other, but on closer inspection I realised that was the point - there's no 2v1-ing. Fantastic use of rocks.
I think the V-shaped areas that connect the three regions in the middle could be a little more open, as it looks like it's fairly easy to deny your opponent from using it as a route to help your ally.
|
I am an avid (ladder) 2v2 player, and I really don't see the point in playing on that kind of map. I'd rather play a 1v1 by myself, rather than play a 1v1 alongside another 1v1.
Also, regarding the above comment and 2v1 situations that reward rush strategies better than any other skillset : yes, those situations are bad, but they don't happen on good maps, because only 2v2 situations happen - not because 1v1 + 1v1 situations happen. There is not a single map left in the ladder pool where a 2v1 situation can legitimately happen, except arguably double 7pool on Scorched Haven. There are still bad maps in the pool, but not for that reason anymore.
|
This map isn't entirely a 1v1+1v1 map. It just stops the very stupid early aggression seen in 2v2. Once the rocks are down, its just a macro 2v2 map.
|
Thanks for the comments.
I realized there was a bug that caused the doodads in the chasms to block pathing on the high ground. I've fixed this issue, so I'll be publishing a new version soon.
I'm going to try to make it a little more easy to swing an army from one side of the map to the other, and open up those paths.
@Apom: Yes, I agree with you. I will try to move this map more towards 2v2 in the later stages, as right now the separate sections are, I think, too separate even after the rocks are down. I of course don't think every 2v2 map should be this way or anything, it's just an idea for maybe a single map in a pool.
Edit: uploaded the new version. It's currently using two sets of large destructible rocks in the middle, although I could replace them with a single horizontal one closer to the ramp.
Also, I just realized this map has the potential to change a lot when resource transferring strats are involved. Hopefully in a good way.
|
I like the idea but I think that in reality it'll just be about walling in and killing the rocks as fast as possible to help your teammate or attack together. I really like how the expansions are layed out!
|
United States9671 Posts
wait do allies spawn on the same left or right side? or can allies be diagonal of each other (AKA can enemies be super close air rush?)
This map looks very interesting, and I'm excited to see how things play out on this map.
|
i see a reaper build just being way to strong on this map, any terran that reapers will turn it into a 2v1.
|
I have a suggestion about the back door rocks. Maybe instead of having the ramp have a highground path that connects the two ally bases with two sets of rocks, and then have a ramp leading down into the base between the mains. That way the enemy can't break into the main and destroy all of your buildings.
|
interesting design, but there are still a few areas where reapers can slip through it seems which could make for a 2v1 situation. But its great to see 2v2 maps. And i someone like the map as a 1v1 design as well haha.
But there is one small issue ... Terran loads in workers, lifts to the base in the middle (takes almost zero time so close) And the first raks will go up to his allieds side, could work for the allieds natural too. Workaround would either be a creep tumor blocking the base or super spores, that can only attack flying buildings and don't have many hp, or a trigger if any unit crosses the middle that the main base rocks get destroyed. I would test first though if this would be an issue ^^.
But the map itself has potential to become a heavy macro map. (would have to test it before i could say it for sure though)
|
On February 27 2012 09:42 FlaShFTW wrote: wait do allies spawn on the same left or right side? or can allies be diagonal of each other (AKA can enemies be super close air rush?)
This map looks very interesting, and I'm excited to see how things play out on this map. No, it should be restricted to allies starting in close air.
On February 27 2012 10:04 kanada wrote: i see a reaper build just being way to strong on this map, any terran that reapers will turn it into a 2v1. That's a good point. I can't believe this didn't cross my mind. I will probably change the terrain so you cannot hop down those cliffs to solve that issue.
On February 27 2012 10:07 Denop wrote:I have a suggestion about the back door rocks. Maybe instead of having the ramp have a highground path that connects the two ally bases with two sets of rocks, and then have a ramp leading down into the base between the mains. That way the enemy can't break into the main and destroy all of your buildings. The goal would be that a lot of emphasis will be on the center and those "backdoor" entrances would become as important as the front door. You'll want to be going in and out of there and positioning your armies in the middle area, not staying in the seperate "1v1" lanes. At least that would be the hope.
On February 27 2012 11:56 FeyFey wrote: interesting design, but there are still a few areas where reapers can slip through it seems which could make for a 2v1 situation. But its great to see 2v2 maps. And i someone like the map as a 1v1 design as well haha.
But there is one small issue ... Terran loads in workers, lifts to the base in the middle (takes almost zero time so close) And the first raks will go up to his allieds side, could work for the allieds natural too. Workaround would either be a creep tumor blocking the base or super spores, that can only attack flying buildings and don't have many hp, or a trigger if any unit crosses the middle that the main base rocks get destroyed. I would test first though if this would be an issue ^^.
But the map itself has potential to become a heavy macro map. (would have to test it before i could say it for sure though) Yeah, the idea of floating the buildings into the other side of the map has the potential to break the map. In order to make this concept work, increasing air distances between the allied bases might be necessary. This would also allow more emphasis on the middle. I could make the naturals all the way in the corners and put 2-3 bases between the allies. This would probably be a better implementation of the concept.
|
Wouldn't floating buildings over make you hilariously vulnerable to a counter attack?
|
On February 27 2012 14:16 Kanil wrote: Wouldn't floating buildings over make you hilariously vulnerable to a counter attack? Not if you also float your CC over, down into the low ground base. I'll put rocks on it. You could still potentially relocate all the way to your ally's nat or something, but it (hopefully) wouldn't be worth it. Terran might just be too strong with this concept, but I hope that's not the case.
|
This is a nice concept, i might try it out with some friends. Ty for making this.
|
I would add a censor tower at the fourths that can cover the backdoor rocks in the main. Reason is that that way the opponent can spot wether or not you are breaking them down to do a 2v1 push and prepare accordingly (e.g. by taking your own rocks down.)
|
It's a fun concept, but it just exacerbates the gimmicky side of 2v2. In trying to force things down a certain path you amplify the degenerate cases. The 2v2 format relies on teamwork to defend exploit-based aggression, and maps should allow for this. Here, it's difficult to help defend in the early game which only magnifies the deadliness of combined attacks.
Reapers, floated rax, and prism 4gate lead to base trade situations at best or unstoppable blowouts at worst, if you want to be realistic. Nevertheless I'm sure this would produce fun games and I hope I get a chance to put it to the test. In other words I don't think it's a suitable map for competitive 2v2 (whatever that means...) but I like it. ;D
[edit] Also you might play around with the health and armor on the "backdoor" rocks so you can get to the middle and your ally more easily. That would prevent all the problems with 2 player timing attacks in the 8-10 minute range based on some kind of mobility exploit like warpins, medivacs, nydus, etc. from being too swingy / too hard to actually prepare for.
That and it looks like this would play great if all the rocks were 25% health (aka free middle access).
You should, if you want to encourage "standard play" (dubious meaning in 2v2 perhaps), provide viable teamwork positions and expansions for the mid- and lategame. It looks like you inherently did this with your layout -- imagine if all the rocks are gone and everyone has a secure and stable natural. At that point it turns into a pair of 1v1s in terms of the expansion pattern from an individual players perspective, but map control is decidedly team-oriented. That's really cool! So, just make sure the early game is as stable as possible because your 1v1 concept will play out into the long game anyway by the nature of the expansion layout -- which is awesome.
|
Aw no way, I was working on a 2v2 map with seperate starting locations too..
|
On February 27 2012 14:16 Kanil wrote: Wouldn't floating buildings over make you hilariously vulnerable to a counter attack?
If, for example, you are terran against protoss in your 1v1 lane, you could easily hold any protoss aggression with bunker repair wall-in while pumping guys out of rax on your teammates side, which would pretty much kill any zerg in the other lane if your teammate contributed any sort of aggression. As one example with 3 given race spawn configurations.
|
On February 27 2012 17:24 EatThePath wrote: It's a fun concept, but it just exacerbates the gimmicky side of 2v2. In trying to force things down a certain path you amplify the degenerate cases. The 2v2 format relies on teamwork to defend exploit-based aggression, and maps should allow for this. Here, it's difficult to help defend in the early game which only magnifies the deadliness of combined attacks.
Reapers, floated rax, and prism 4gate lead to base trade situations at best or unstoppable blowouts at worst, if you want to be realistic. Nevertheless I'm sure this would produce fun games and I hope I get a chance to put it to the test. In other words I don't think it's a suitable map for competitive 2v2 (whatever that means...) but I like it. ;D
[edit] Also you might play around with the health and armor on the "backdoor" rocks so you can get to the middle and your ally more easily. That would prevent all the problems with 2 player timing attacks in the 8-10 minute range based on some kind of mobility exploit like warpins, medivacs, nydus, etc. from being too swingy / too hard to actually prepare for.
That and it looks like this would play great if all the rocks were 25% health (aka free middle access).
You should, if you want to encourage "standard play" (dubious meaning in 2v2 perhaps), provide viable teamwork positions and expansions for the mid- and lategame. It looks like you inherently did this with your layout -- imagine if all the rocks are gone and everyone has a secure and stable natural. At that point it turns into a pair of 1v1s in terms of the expansion pattern from an individual players perspective, but map control is decidedly team-oriented. That's really cool! So, just make sure the early game is as stable as possible because your 1v1 concept will play out into the long game anyway by the nature of the expansion layout -- which is awesome. That's actually the exact opposite of what I want. I want it to only resemble 1v1 in the very early stages, and not later on. I think to do that the allies would have to expand towards each other instead of away. Moving the allies further apart would make it too hard to float rax as well, which would probably fix most any problems. Reapers can be stopped setting up the terrain properly, and anything high tech should allow enough time for you to deal with it as long as you are scouting and whatnot.
Of course none of this can really be said without extensive testing, and the state of 2v2 is not in a place to really prove something is playable or not at this point, unless it's obviously completely broken.
|
|
|
|