• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 18:08
CEST 00:08
KST 07:08
  • 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
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall9HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL59Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?13FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event19Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster16Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1
StarCraft 2
General
Program: SC2 / XSplit / OBS Scene Switcher Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form? PiG Sty Festival #5: Playoffs Preview + Groups Recap
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series Korean Starcraft League Week 77 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Semi Finals & Finals
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady
Brood War
General
Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL SC uni coach streams logging into betting site BGH Mineral Boosts Tutorial Video Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL Replays question
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET Small VOD Thread 2.0 [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
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
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Trading/Investing Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 535 users

[D] Third Base Design

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
1 2 3 Next All
monk
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States8476 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 22:06:11
August 08 2012 21:07 GMT
#1
I was looking at some of the maps in this forum, and I'm beginning to see a common "mistake" in these maps. A lot of the maps look pretty and are well made, but there's one key balance/design problem that I think most map-makers either don't know or ignore. This is that on most custom maps, it's too hard for Protoss to take a third against Zerg. Next to Protoss being able to FFE (which most map-makers take into account), I believe this is the most important feature that needs to be addressed in maps. Against extremely heavy roach pressure, commonly known as "Stephano Style Roach Aggression", it is impossible for Protoss to take a third on certain maps. Here are some map features that allow Protoss to take a third:
  • Short distance between natural and third. Ex: Cloud Kingdom, Entombed Valley
  • The ability to bounce back between the natural and third without running into enemy units. Ex: Cloud Kingdom, Entombed Valley, Daybreak, Not Korhal Compound
  • Chokes and/or ramps to the entrances of the natural/third. Ex: Cloud Kingdom, Entombed Valley
  • Small surface area to cover with forcefields to all bases. Ex: Not Antiga Shipyards, Not Dual Sight
  • Large rush distance to opponent's natural/third. Ex: Metropolis, Whirlwind, Not Antiga Shipyards

Impossible for Protoss to take a passive third
  • Korhal Compound: Distance between natural and third is too long,
  • Dual Sight: Too much surface area to cover between both natural and third.

Really really hard for Protoss to take a passive third
  • Antiga Shipyards: Too much surface area to cover between natural and third, needs about 7 forcefields to cover the whole thing
  • Shakuras Plateau: Too much surface area to cover between natural and tucked third, need a ton of forcefields. You can't bounce back between natural and opposite natural, should you choose to take that as your third.

Acceptable Standard Maps-not too easy, not too hard
  • Daybreak: large choke to third and large ramp at natural make it somewhat difficult
  • Cloud Kingdom: two paths to the third make it somewhat difficult
  • Metropolis: large rush distance helps deter roach attacks greatly
  • Whirlwind: the natural/third design is actually bad for vs roach attacks, but the size of the maps counteracts this greatly
  • Atlantis Spaceship
  • Ohana

Probably too easy to take a third
  • Entombed Valley: all PvZs are generally very passive here, has almost all the features Protoss could want to take an easy third. Still, a somewhat acceptable map
  • Calm Before The Storm: way too easy to get both the natural and third

If a map is too easy for Protoss to take a third, you'll end up with overly passive games. If it's too hard, Protoss will always 2 base all-in. You'll also notice that most of the maps that are too easy/hard are being phased out, while all of the acceptable standard maps are the ones we currently use. In the future, at least until HotS comes out to change things, it's probably better to make maps that are at least somewhat easy to take a third on. That's all. Good day!
Moderator
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 21:25:31
August 08 2012 21:25 GMT
#2
I'm delighted you brought up this subject, monk. As a protoss player and mapper, I usually spend the most time worrying about the 3rd base precisely because of PvZ, for exactly the reasons you sum up with.

I was looking at some of the maps in this forum, and I'm beginning to see a common "mistake" in these maps.

As to that... realize that many of these maps have myriad problems of varying severity. They are works in progress, or flawed attempts by novice mappers. In general the large majority of maps here are "playable" but very few are quite "competitive" out of the box without demanding a tilted metagame.

Nevertheless it's something very important for mappers to realize, so again, I'm glad you brought it up. The first 3 bases define PvZ so drastically compared to the other matchups (from the mapper's perspective). Moreover, the 4th base options really direct the protoss player's plan in a macro game. Entombed Valley has stupid passive games because no one can deny bases without it being a winning blow anyway, so it usually becomes a long, drawn out cost-effectiveness war with very little opportunity to divert before the late game.

I'm looking forward to seeing some responses so I can address specific points; I have given a ton of thought to this, but for now I can't improve upon the summary in the OP.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
SidianTheBard
Profile Joined October 2010
United States2474 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 21:42:50
August 08 2012 21:37 GMT
#3
Looking at your Acceptable maps I do agree with you for the most part but I also think that the third on metropolis isn't a good map to point out. The 3rd is quite open and even more so if you knock down any rocks. I feel the only reason it works well on the map is because of how gigantic the map is. Plus depending on the spawn positions going from Your main to enemy 3rd is going to take longer then it would be to go from your main to enemy natural.

The major problem I see in most maps lately is that the 3rd is close enough to the natural so it feels like it should be easy to take, yet it is completely wide open which means defending it against a 3 base Stephano style play is just about impossible. Having just the right amount of chokage around the 3rd will make or break it into a good map.

I also think high ground pods need to come back into play. With or Without ramps to them. Honestly look at Lost Temple, having the high ground by the natural for tank drops was a nightmare for zerg. Now though, with maps getting bigger and bigger, zergs making more queens for defense and overall zergs just getting better; playing Lost Temple wouldn't be as Terran Favored as it use to be. (Well this and not having close by ground positions lol). Having high ground pods now just means that terran and protoss have a safer way to harass the natural/3rd without having to go all-in.

A game I always like to think back to is the MMA vs DRG game 7 on shakuras when MMA kept putting tanks and thors up on the high ground in the middle of shakuras. That is one of the only reasons he was able to hold his ground, and even so DRG was still able to break through multiple times but for the most part he lost too many units to be able to finish this off. Every single map made today doesn't have any random high ground pods and if they do they are in spots that don't matter at all. It also means Terran and Protoss can take the forward third on shakuras because terran can set up units on the high ground in their main, or in the middle of the map to defend.
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.
monk
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States8476 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 22:04:18
August 08 2012 22:04 GMT
#4
On August 09 2012 06:37 SidianTheBard wrote:
Looking at your Acceptable maps I do agree with you for the most part but I also think that the third on metropolis isn't a good map to point out. The 3rd is quite open and even more so if you knock down any rocks. I feel the only reason it works well on the map is because of how gigantic the map is. Plus depending on the spawn positions going from Your main to enemy 3rd is going to take longer then it would be to go from your main to enemy natural.

The major problem I see in most maps lately is that the 3rd is close enough to the natural so it feels like it should be easy to take, yet it is completely wide open which means defending it against a 3 base Stephano style play is just about impossible. Having just the right amount of chokage around the 3rd will make or break it into a good map.

I also think high ground pods need to come back into play. With or Without ramps to them. Honestly look at Lost Temple, having the high ground by the natural for tank drops was a nightmare for zerg. Now though, with maps getting bigger and bigger, zergs making more queens for defense and overall zergs just getting better; playing Lost Temple wouldn't be as Terran Favored as it use to be. (Well this and not having close by ground positions lol). Having high ground pods now just means that terran and protoss have a safer way to harass the natural/3rd without having to go all-in.

A game I always like to think back to is the MMA vs DRG game 7 on shakuras when MMA kept putting tanks and thors up on the high ground in the middle of shakuras. That is one of the only reasons he was able to hold his ground, and even so DRG was still able to break through multiple times but for the most part he lost too many units to be able to finish this off. Every single map made today doesn't have any random high ground pods and if they do they are in spots that don't matter at all. It also means Terran and Protoss can take the forward third on shakuras because terran can set up units on the high ground in their main, or in the middle of the map to defend.

Yea, Metropolis isn't ideal, but it is one of the maps where it's easy to take a third, partially because of the long rush distance. Whirlwind is another map that shares this characteristic, but even more so. The natural/third design, on their own are pretty bad for taking a third in PvZ, but the large rush distance deter roach attacks. I'll add that in as a feature.
Moderator
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 00:41:48
August 08 2012 22:14 GMT
#5
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]


In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

Edit: spoiler'd the images for sanity's sake. x_x!
Twitter: @iamcaustic
GenesisX
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
Canada4267 Posts
August 08 2012 22:22 GMT
#6
Personally I think maps like Ohana are ideal. In the early game, Zerg has to traverse a farther distance to defend a third base, making protoss pressure stronger. However, this doesn't make it harder for Protoss to take a third because the rocks also help to defend the base. I think you have to have maps like these because if you make it to easy to defend the third base, Zergs will have a hard time attacking Terran in ZvT. Maps like Entombed Valley allow Terran to turtle very easily on three bases which is very hard for Zerg because they are forced to play a certain style (turtle to fast 5 bases and infestor broodlord bust). Counter attacks on maps like these (which are essential in ZvT) are too difficult.
133 221 333 123 111
TibblesEvilCat
Profile Joined March 2010
United Kingdom766 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 22:32:29
August 08 2012 22:30 GMT
#7
i follow a rule of thumb beging,
1 base, defend with 1 ff
2 base defend with 2 ff
3 base defend with 5 ff

(1,2,3,5,8,13)

fibbie ftw :D

but this does stale out the game, there needs to be maps that favor certin styles and other parts, otherwise it go on forever :D
Live Fast Die Young :D
Plexa
Profile Blog Joined October 2005
Aotearoa39261 Posts
August 08 2012 22:30 GMT
#8
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

[snip]

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

BW doesn't work the same way as SC2 and to be honest when I see you start talking about death balls I begin to not take you seriously because deathballs are not a huge problem in sc2 anymore. SC2 is a lot more restricted than in BW with respect to how far your third can be from your base. For instance, here is a BW adaptation of Cloud Kingdom

+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


The distance between the natural and the third, in game, is much bigger than its counterpart in SC2.

In any case, mappers need to be aware of appropriate third (and fourth) expansion distances and is easily one of the biggest things done wrong in a lot of maps (even the 'good' ones).
Administrator~ Spirit will set you free ~
monitor
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States2404 Posts
August 08 2012 22:36 GMT
#9
Map design always comes first, and then balance. Any map can be balanced through a series of choke adjustments, mineral count adjustments, etc. Its hard for me to articulate my thoughts on the third, but basically I think its not worth focusing so much specifically to make sure its balanced and fits the metagame. However, it is a major point of map design.

What is worth focusing on is the map concept of a map, and unfortunately SC2 maps have had very weak concepts so far (however, I know there are lots of outstanding maps coming up soon, that aren't released yet). Easy thirds only have so many options when the main and natural are the standard layout, which results in very boring and repetitive maps/games. I've been starting to experiment a lot with this. For example:

WIP 4player:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


Bloody ridge:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


Bizarre positional balance:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]

Mapmaker & TLMC Judge. Amygdala, Frostline, Crimson Court, and Korhal Compound (WoL).
monk
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States8476 Posts
August 08 2012 23:05 GMT
#10
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

I agree that in general, SC2 maps are boring, especially compared to BW maps. However, I for one, cannot think of creative ways for Protoss to take a third otherwise. For Protoss to take an early/acceptable third(7-10 minutes), only basic gateway units, immortals, and stargate units are accessible to defend it. The nature of these units are somewhat death-ballish, especially sentries. Unlike BW, reavers(colossi) and templar are not really viable as a unit that can cost effectively defend a third. And perhaps this is a SC2 flaw(no Protoss unit can cost effectively defend against roaches alone, ie reaver, siege tank), but that's another story. Whatever the case, the fact is that all the BW maps you provided as examples would not let Protoss take a third in SC2.
Moderator
-NegativeZero-
Profile Joined August 2011
United States2141 Posts
August 08 2012 23:47 GMT
#11
On August 09 2012 08:05 NrGmonk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

I agree that in general, SC2 maps are boring, especially compared to BW maps. However, I for one, cannot think of creative ways for Protoss to take a third otherwise. For Protoss to take an early/acceptable third(7-10 minutes), only basic gateway units, immortals, and stargate units are accessible to defend it. The nature of these units are somewhat death-ballish, especially sentries. Unlike BW, reavers(colossi) and templar are not really viable as a unit that can cost effectively defend a third. And perhaps this is a SC2 flaw(no Protoss unit can cost effectively defend against roaches alone, ie reaver, siege tank), but that's another story. Whatever the case, the fact is that all the BW maps you provided as examples would not let Protoss take a third in SC2.

I think part of it, too, is that in BW PvZ you can actually delay your third for quite a long time without it being harmful, just because protoss units, reaver/templar especially, are so cost efficient vs zerg early/mid game compositions (hydra/ling with fairly low amounts of lurkers) that it's ok to be behind economically. As a result, protoss players often take the third after they already have a large enough army that they can move out onto the map and engage the zerg army before it actually reaches the third, as opposed to the SC2 style of having to turtle hard to maintain the 3 bases.
vibeo gane,
-NegativeZero-
Profile Joined August 2011
United States2141 Posts
August 09 2012 00:00 GMT
#12
On August 09 2012 07:30 Plexa wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

[snip]

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

BW doesn't work the same way as SC2 and to be honest when I see you start talking about death balls I begin to not take you seriously because deathballs are not a huge problem in sc2 anymore. SC2 is a lot more restricted than in BW with respect to how far your third can be from your base. For instance, here is a BW adaptation of Cloud Kingdom

+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


The distance between the natural and the third, in game, is much bigger than its counterpart in SC2.

In any case, mappers need to be aware of appropriate third (and fourth) expansion distances and is easily one of the biggest things done wrong in a lot of maps (even the 'good' ones).

In that Cloud Kingdom BW version, I don't think the third really is farther - maybe slightly because the mains are bigger and push it to the side. But stuff in BW in general looks smaller (units, terrain features, etc) and the screen is more zoomed in, so distances can sometimes appear to be larger.

Anyway, that map sucks and isn't really a good example of an SC2 map that would work well in BW anyway (and I made it so I'm allowed to express that opinion lol)
vibeo gane,
Pocky52
Profile Joined November 2011
United States463 Posts
August 09 2012 00:15 GMT
#13
I'm curious how much in base expos can be considered a solution to this problem, because while they have been shown to create passive games, (ie Crevasse, Calm Before the Storm) I think that by giving the easy expo, making the third more difficult would work as if it was positioned as a difficult to take natural, such that it can be more of a focus to defend because main/2nd are easier to defend... I'm curious how a revised Terminus style map would work out nowadays as well... also I think an extremely part of the third dynamics are the fourth, and that they must be made together, which is why it seems so difficult to get it right... And tp be clear I mostly mean this in the sense of pressuring the zerg before they get to 4 base, because at toss, once they get to 3 base their army can usually be enough to hold a fourth through power, but if zerg can get to 4/5 base too fast it makes it difficult for protoss to do anything without their own 4th.
Gfire
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1699 Posts
August 09 2012 00:16 GMT
#14
I basically agree with that's been said. I think mappers need to make the thirds have smaller chokes rather than bringing them closer to the nat.

However I realized that almost all my concepts right now involve some sort of in-base expansion so it's not really applicable.


Concerning Entombed Valley: While it does seem extra passive, I want to bring up what I thought was a positive benefit of that. I feel it has encouraged innovation from Zerg players, who've started using mass drop play due to the easy to defend third. I won't elaborate on that, I just wanted to bring it up and see what anyone else thought about it.
all's fair in love and melodies
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 09 2012 00:28 GMT
#15
On August 09 2012 07:30 Plexa wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

[snip]

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

BW doesn't work the same way as SC2 and to be honest when I see you start talking about death balls I begin to not take you seriously because deathballs are not a huge problem in sc2 anymore. SC2 is a lot more restricted than in BW with respect to how far your third can be from your base. For instance, here is a BW adaptation of Cloud Kingdom

+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


The distance between the natural and the third, in game, is much bigger than its counterpart in SC2.

In any case, mappers need to be aware of appropriate third (and fourth) expansion distances and is easily one of the biggest things done wrong in a lot of maps (even the 'good' ones).

While I can agree that "BW doesn't work the same way as SC2", I find it a highly vague and disingenuous reason to dismiss a specific map design concept. I also can't take you seriously if you say death balls are not a huge problem in SC2 anymore. While we've seen glimpses of brilliance in some tournament-level games (some games by players like Sage and Hero come to mind), the de-facto standard in SC2 is still to move everything in one big group. Look at late-game PvZ; if it wasn't for warp prisms and the occasional warp-in round of zealots, everything would be completely clumped together on both sides. Terran mid-game on some maps tends to be rather dynamic by virtue of having to deal damage lest they get crushed by superior death balls, but mech compositions and/or certain maps like Metropolis still even have Terran sitting around death balling it up quite often.

That's not to say we don't see aggressive strategies and early wins in SC2, but anything outside of a 2-base all-in generally defaults to death ball. I challenge you to demonstrate otherwise on that one -- we still see posts even on TL pop up from people suggesting their own ideas and solutions to "fix the death ball problem", and even the new unit designs in HotS are focused around "pulling supply from the death ball" in order to "break it up", to paraphrase Dustin Browder.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 09 2012 00:33 GMT
#16
On August 09 2012 08:05 NrGmonk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 07:14 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm also glad this point has been brought up. For a little while now I've been talking about third bases, and how the current solution seems to be creating third bases to be more of a "second natural" in terms of its proximity and ease of defence. I think this method, while it allows defence against the Stephano-style roach aggression, contributes heavily to the passive, death ball-style of play that seems to plague StarCraft 2. The idea around defending these bases is to sit your big army in between the natural and third, and bounce back and forth wherever pressure is being applied. In other words, it's designed in a way that assumes death ball.

I wrote a blog post talking a bit about current maps like Ohana, Cloud Kingdom, and Daybreak, and how this 3 base paradigm affects the game. I'm honestly of the opinion that mapmakers haven't explored enough with the dynamic between choked/open areas in their terrain design, particularly as it pertains to base defence. Take a look at any of the maps I already mentioned in SC2, and then compare them with some Brood War examples:

In all of these BW examples, the thirds are positioned in a way that don't allow for easy bounce back between the third and natural, but the answer lay with the ability to defend the third with tight chokes. It's a terrain design that encourages splitting of the army to defend, and such splitting actually works (as opposed to just getting your army crushed) thanks to the chokes that prevent a larger army from utilizing its full potential. Consequently, it becomes more effective/desirable to rather send in smaller harassment groups, rather than brute forcing with a full army.

Surprisingly, we have yet to really see this concept attempted in tournament-level SC2 maps.

I agree that in general, SC2 maps are boring, especially compared to BW maps. However, I for one, cannot think of creative ways for Protoss to take a third otherwise. For Protoss to take an early/acceptable third(7-10 minutes), only basic gateway units, immortals, and stargate units are accessible to defend it. The nature of these units are somewhat death-ballish, especially sentries. Unlike BW, reavers(colossi) and templar are not really viable as a unit that can cost effectively defend a third. And perhaps this is a SC2 flaw(no Protoss unit can cost effectively defend against roaches alone, ie reaver, siege tank), but that's another story. Whatever the case, the fact is that all the BW maps you provided as examples would not let Protoss take a third in SC2.

We've seen that photon cannons are capable of helping to hold natural bases even in SC2 (the FFE). With smaller chokes at a third, might it not be possible to consider that perhaps the answer in this "further away, more tightly choked third" concept for Protoss is to also utilize cannon defence at the third, on top of warp-in mechanics and forcefields? Taking queues from Brood War, essentially, while taking into account SC2 design.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
Zariel
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
Australia1285 Posts
August 09 2012 00:38 GMT
#17
Haven't mappers realised that the ramps are so freaking huge in game than when you look at it on an overview?

I would prefer if more bases were tucked in a tighter choke. This would allow much easier defense of expansions
sup
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 09 2012 00:41 GMT
#18
On August 09 2012 09:16 Gfire wrote:
I basically agree with that's been said. I think mappers need to make the thirds have smaller chokes rather than bringing them closer to the nat.

However I realized that almost all my concepts right now involve some sort of in-base expansion so it's not really applicable.


Concerning Entombed Valley: While it does seem extra passive, I want to bring up what I thought was a positive benefit of that. I feel it has encouraged innovation from Zerg players, who've started using mass drop play due to the easy to defend third. I won't elaborate on that, I just wanted to bring it up and see what anyone else thought about it.

That's certainly an interesting point. I do have to wonder, however, if we couldn't see a similar result from more defensible (albeit more spread out) bases. In theory, wouldn't it be the same concept: Zerg wouldn't be able to just brute-force their way in with a lot of units (e.g. mass roach), requiring an alternative approach to get in and deal damage?

I don't have any substance to back that, just theory crafting in my head.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
Johanaz
Profile Joined September 2010
Denmark363 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 00:56:15
August 09 2012 00:53 GMT
#19
I´d like an expert opinion on these 3rds:

+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


All spawns enabled so you choose a 3rd depending on where your opponent is. I put force fields in the pic to show the different choke sizes.


edit: the 2ff choke can equally be walled off with 2 gateways or 3 pylons
TPW Map Maker - theplanetaryworkshop.com
AdrianHealey
Profile Joined January 2011
Belgium480 Posts
August 09 2012 01:11 GMT
#20
Seems like very good, solid map on face value.
I love.
1 2 3 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 11h 52m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
JuggernautJason126
ProTech88
Nina 78
NeuroSwarm 0
StarCraft: Brood War
firebathero 239
NaDa 36
Rock 35
LancerX 26
Dota 2
LuMiX1
League of Legends
Grubby3573
Dendi1369
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu538
Khaldor269
Other Games
summit1g9604
FrodaN2198
fl0m680
RotterdaM474
Sick60
ViBE28
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV42
StarCraft 2
angryscii 27
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 23 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH288
• davetesta43
• musti20045 37
• tFFMrPink 19
• OhrlRock 4
• Kozan
• Migwel
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• Pr0nogo 8
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21446
• Ler129
League of Legends
• Doublelift3976
• Jankos2548
Other Games
• imaqtpie1127
• Shiphtur467
• WagamamaTV375
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
11h 52m
Clem vs Classic
SHIN vs Cure
FEL
13h 52m
WardiTV European League
13h 52m
BSL: ProLeague
19h 52m
Dewalt vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
WardiTV European League
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
FEL
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
FEL
6 days
FEL
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL 2v2 Season 3
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
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

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
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.