EPT---
TPW Stormborn
By Archvile
156x172
Available on EU
---
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DqjnVl.jpg)
Top down overview
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rRu61l.jpg)
Close ups
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8lrCJl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6XRLdl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IJyzOl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ga6sel.jpg)
TPW Stormborn
By Archvile
156x172
Available on EU
---
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DqjnV.jpg)
Top down overview
+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rRu61.jpg)
Close ups
+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8lrCJ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6XRLd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IJyzO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ga6se.jpg)
[M] (2v2) TPW Stormborn
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
| ||
|
Sumadin
Denmark588 Posts
I don't know much about 2v2 maps so can't really say alot. Islands and Gold bases are both there so lots of Variety. Wish we would see that more often in 1v1 maps. | ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
On December 05 2012 18:59 Sumadin wrote: The Top down overview picture isn't working nor is the lowest of the close ups. I don't know much about 2v2 maps so can't really say alot. Islands and Gold bases are both there so lots of Variety. Wish we would see that more often in 1v1 maps. yea imgur is causing me a headacke right now. I have tried uploading the missing pictures several times and they still wont show. I will try again later. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
Only thing I don't like is the name, it doesn't really make sense for the aesthetics :-P But I guess that doesn't really matter. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
Other than that seems like a good map, but will have to try it a bit before giving more feedback. EDIT: only played a single game so far, but what I can say already is that the mineral placement is not optimal, you should copy mineral and gas placements from ladder maps, right now some patches are further than the standard. | ||
|
U_G_L_Y
United States516 Posts
6pool/cannon still may be strong, not sure about the scale of this map. | ||
|
HyDrA_solic
Portugal491 Posts
| ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
| ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
| ||
|
cpc
Australia126 Posts
 . Much better then all the 2v2 ladder maps. | ||
|
shizaep
Canada2920 Posts
| ||
Nisyax
Netherlands756 Posts
| ||
|
Callynn
Netherlands917 Posts
I can see most openings that include air rush to be effective here, such as banshee, muta and phoenix/vr openings while the other teammate defends. The wide opening towards the naturals adresses this somewhat, because expanding and rushing is very hard with such a ramp I like it and will give it a try today. | ||
|
VoirDire
Sweden1923 Posts
| ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
On December 06 2012 21:39 VoirDire wrote: It might be too good to hold the middle. It's high ground, easily defendable and there is no way to bypass it on the ground. Well, if anything some of the 2v2 metagame would be different. Normally blink stalkers are great in 2v2; here they would be pretty mediocre. Tanks can be outmaneuvered on a lot of 2v2 maps, but here they might be strong. etc. | ||
|
Quakecomm
United States344 Posts
| ||
FlaShFTW
United States10402 Posts
| ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
On December 13 2012 09:13 FlaShFTW wrote: too easy to take the naturals. one give dynamic of 2v2s is that there's a major risk in fast expoing. here, it is too easy to defend a quick expo. I think some of this could be alleviated by, as Callynn pointed out, making the naturals cliff-walkable. It might be necessary to give the attacking team a spot for ranged units to shoot up at the units on top. Right now the only thing attackers have going for them is they are on the right side of the concave. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
On December 13 2012 09:13 FlaShFTW wrote: too easy to take the naturals. one give dynamic of 2v2s is that there's a major risk in fast expoing. here, it is too easy to defend a quick expo. Did you play the map? On what basis do you say that? I have played on it several times and actually the natural is pretty hard to take since its very open, also the main entrance is pretty open. For example look at a map like molten core, taking the natural there requires much less buildings, of course there are much harder maps to take the natural, but also here you can't take one base easily, it is as hard to take 2 as it is to take 1. The only thing that makes the naturals easier to take than on most maps is the rush distance, which is pretty large, but this map supposes to be a macro map, so its cool. | ||
|
Sjokola
Netherlands800 Posts
| ||
|
Samro225am
Germany982 Posts
On December 13 2012 18:51 Sjokola wrote: I look like if you're playing terran holding the middle w/ tanks lets you lockdown the whole map. No other routes to run around. that's a lot of tanks.have you tried that in game? let us know if you were successful. That is a lot of supply stretched out thin. the middle is quite large. | ||
|
hfsrj
Germany166 Posts
| ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
Of course in the midgame if a Protoss / Terran can get a good wall of cannons and siege tanks with some sentry support they have a very good position, but the Zerg players can try to break the hold in the middle until the wall is formed or try to go around it, since in the midgame you won't have enough units to both defend the middle and your bases. While only 1 large path in the middle is not common, I think its OK on this map since air harass should be pretty easy and cause the place of the contain still lets you have a lot of bases possible, which allows you to tech up. | ||
|
Ruinsteel
United States43 Posts
The aesthetics are clean and simple, and there are actually expansions past 2 bases! Definitely an improvement over current ladder 2v2 maps, which really, in my opinion, need to be changed. Overall, I think its a good 2v2 map, definitely something I wouldn't veto! | ||
| ||
