• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 02:41
CET 07:41
KST 15:41
  • 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
ByuL: The Forgotten Master of ZvT30Behind the Blue - Team Liquid History Book19Clem wins HomeStory Cup 289HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview13Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info8
Community News
2026 KongFu Cup Announcement4BGE Stara Zagora 2026 cancelled12Blizzard Classic Cup - Tastosis announced as captains15Weekly Cups (March 2-8): ByuN overcomes PvT block4GSL CK - New online series19
StarCraft 2
General
GSL CK - New online series BGE Stara Zagora 2026 cancelled Blizzard Classic Cup - Tastosis announced as captains BGE Stara Zagora 2026 announced ByuL: The Forgotten Master of ZvT
Tourneys
2026 KongFu Cup Announcement RSL Season 4 announced for March-April PIG STY FESTIVAL 7.0! (19 Feb - 1 Mar) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament [GSL CK] Team Maru vs. Team herO
Strategy
Custom Maps
Publishing has been re-enabled! [Feb 24th 2026] Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 517 Distant Threat The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 516 Specter of Death Mutation # 515 Together Forever
Brood War
General
ASL21 General Discussion BSL 22 Map Contest — Submissions OPEN to March 10 BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Are you ready for ASL 21? Hype VIDEO Gypsy to Korea
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL22] Open Qualifiers & Ladder Tours IPSL Spring 2026 is here! ASL Season 21 Qualifiers March 7-8
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Soma's 9 hatch build from ASL Game 2 Fighting Spirit mining rates Zealot bombing is no longer popular?
Other Games
General Games
Dawn of War IV Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread PC Games Sales Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion The Story of Wings Gaming
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
Five o'clock TL Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas Vanilla Mini Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Mexico's Drug War Russo-Ukrainian War Thread NASA and the Private Sector
Fan Clubs
The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2026 Football Thread General nutrition recommendations Cricket [SPORT] TL MMA Pick'em Pool 2013
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Laptop capable of using Photoshop Lightroom?
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Money Laundering In Video Ga…
TrAiDoS
Iranian anarchists: organize…
XenOsky
FS++
Kraekkling
Shocked by a laser…
Spydermine0240
Unintentional protectionism…
Uldridge
ASL S21 English Commentary…
namkraft
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 3340 users

[M] (4) Apollo - Page 2

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 All
TheFish7
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
United States2824 Posts
January 02 2013 23:57 GMT
#21
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.
~ ~ <°)))><~ ~ ~
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
January 03 2013 01:12 GMT
#22
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-03 02:28:58
January 03 2013 02:28 GMT
#23
On January 03 2013 07:31 Fatam wrote:
Burrowed ultras is a really cool idea. Should be interesting to see how useful they actually are at that location - most early engages probably won't be near there, and once protoss wants to take that base as a 4th, the ultras will be killable within seconds. I guess it makes an immortal sentry push trying to go through there in horizontal spawn PvZ a little bit more vulnerable, but that would only happen in maybe 5% of all games on the map, and even less in the future when immortal sentry inevitably gets phased out in HOTS.

Still the idea itself is great and has potential I think.



Its a third for vertical spawn. Is used.
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Samro225am
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany982 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-03 09:39:54
January 03 2013 09:38 GMT
#24
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
January 03 2013 10:28 GMT
#25
On January 03 2013 18:38 Samro225am wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.



Nope. the ideas i had with this map isnt like that. You shouldnt just increase size. Thayd make the map empty in other parts. Just increasing the size is very lazy; just for the sake of distance? what about the other components like the location of bases the just how far away bases are from each other? this is not a 16 base map.
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Daumen
Profile Joined July 2011
Germany1073 Posts
January 03 2013 13:41 GMT
#26
burrowed ultras... I heard it here first ;D gg
President of the ReaL Fan Club.
Samro225am
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany982 Posts
January 03 2013 14:27 GMT
#27
On January 03 2013 19:28 Semmo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 18:38 Samro225am wrote:
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.



Nope. the ideas i had with this map isnt like that. You shouldnt just increase size. Thayd make the map empty in other parts. Just increasing the size is very lazy; just for the sake of distance? what about the other components like the location of bases the just how far away bases are from each other? this is not a 16 base map.


you can achieve 42 cross with mapbound that extend over 144. possibly not square, but still.

you are correct on 12bases and empty space - yet i think the winding path just does not work too well as a features, because the 'connectivity' is so low and as i wrote earlier most action will be back and forth via the middle.
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
January 03 2013 14:40 GMT
#28
On January 03 2013 23:27 Samro225am wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 19:28 Semmo wrote:
On January 03 2013 18:38 Samro225am wrote:
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.



Nope. the ideas i had with this map isnt like that. You shouldnt just increase size. Thayd make the map empty in other parts. Just increasing the size is very lazy; just for the sake of distance? what about the other components like the location of bases the just how far away bases are from each other? this is not a 16 base map.


you can achieve 42 cross with mapbound that extend over 144. possibly not square, but still.

you are correct on 12bases and empty space - yet i think the winding path just does not work too well as a features, because the 'connectivity' is so low and as i wrote earlier most action will be back and forth via the middle.


im saying that i do not want a map that large. it is unnecesary. Alsp It is 14 bases btw.
And regarding the center - yeah it is fine that most fights happen in the center. The winding paths are not designed for large armies, they are for counter attacks, Strategical moves, and base defense.
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Samro225am
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany982 Posts
January 03 2013 16:20 GMT
#29
On January 03 2013 23:40 Semmo wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On January 03 2013 23:27 Samro225am wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 19:28 Semmo wrote:
On January 03 2013 18:38 Samro225am wrote:
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.



Nope. the ideas i had with this map isnt like that. You shouldnt just increase size. Thayd make the map empty in other parts. Just increasing the size is very lazy; just for the sake of distance? what about the other components like the location of bases the just how far away bases are from each other? this is not a 16 base map.


you can achieve 42 cross with mapbound that extend over 144. possibly not square, but still.

you are correct on 12bases and empty space - yet i think the winding path just does not work too well as a features, because the 'connectivity' is so low and as i wrote earlier most action will be back and forth via the middle.


im saying that i do not want a map that large. it is unnecesary. Alsp It is 14 bases btw.
And regarding the center - yeah it is fine that most fights happen in the center.
The winding paths are not designed for large armies, they are for counter attacks, Strategical moves, and base defense.


this is it. and this mechancic is exactly what i doubt to work, because these paths are quite separated from the rest, rendering the map into a one-way battlefield.
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
January 03 2013 17:17 GMT
#30
Samro// No it is not. There definitely are counter attack paths, although there is the main one as well.
Ypu cant just disregard the other path just because there is emphasis on the center.

With the removal of the xelnaga should alleviate what you think as well.
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Gfire
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1699 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-03 22:14:24
January 03 2013 22:11 GMT
#31
Uh... It's probably similar to Shakuras. The mid is a similar size and it seems like a similar distance out to the path on the outside. Kinda like Entombed as well. It's far from broken, and, in my opinion, as least somewhat interesting.

I'm interested to see how this map would play out.

Edit: Why do burrowed ultras stop FFs, though? That's kinda weird. Shouldn't they only break them when they unburrow? It's a clever feature, anyway.

FF-proof terrain is really something that could be quite useful to balance things, especially smaller chokes which can often be used for defenders advantage but favor sentry compositions too much.
all's fair in love and melodies
Targe
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
United Kingdom14103 Posts
January 03 2013 23:36 GMT
#32
Wow. That burrowed Ultra idea is incredible, I seriously hope that gets used in future maps to allow more variance in how chokes can be designed.
11/5/14 CATACLYSM | The South West's worst Falco main
Greendotz
Profile Joined October 2011
United Kingdom2053 Posts
January 04 2013 00:12 GMT
#33
The burrowed ultra idea is ingenious. However, forgive me for been a miserable cynic, but by the time those bases actually become contested odds are the Protoss will have the resources (obs/envision) to quickly dispatch the ultras and be free to FF business as usual? Seems a little gimmicky, but I still love the lateral thinking behind it.
Gfire
Profile Joined March 2011
United States1699 Posts
January 04 2013 01:50 GMT
#34
On January 04 2013 09:12 Greendotz wrote:
The burrowed ultra idea is ingenious. However, forgive me for been a miserable cynic, but by the time those bases actually become contested odds are the Protoss will have the resources (obs/envision) to quickly dispatch the ultras and be free to FF business as usual? Seems a little gimmicky, but I still love the lateral thinking behind it.

I think offensive FFS would be more important to stop, but it would be harder to kill the ultra offensively. Sentry drops, etc. could be deadly on a base like that without them, so it helps for that.
all's fair in love and melodies
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-04 02:16:03
January 04 2013 02:06 GMT
#35
On January 04 2013 07:11 Gfire wrote:
Uh... It's probably similar to Shakuras. The mid is a similar size and it seems like a similar distance out to the path on the outside. Kinda like Entombed as well. It's far from broken, and, in my opinion, as least somewhat interesting.

I'm interested to see how this map would play out.

Edit: Why do burrowed ultras stop FFs, though? That's kinda weird. Shouldn't they only break them when they unburrow? It's a clever feature, anyway.

FF-proof terrain is really something that could be quite useful to balance things, especially smaller chokes which can often be used for defenders advantage but favor sentry compositions too much.

Forcefields actually go underground in a sphere (I think). So the burrowed ultras still block them there. That begs the question, why does a unit but not inanimate dirt and rocks obstruct a forcefield? It must have to do with psi technology and living things interact where simple matter doesn't.
/lore

The "unforcefieldable" mechanic should definitely be used more. It's sort of a gimmick to use burrowed ultras and not just a data/trigger implementation, but it does have a clarity of purpose and implementation that will be relatively easy for an uninitiated player to understand, even though it doesn't make any sense that there are ultralisks burrowed. You might just as well use neutral colossus duplicates with the "nervous twitch" turned off so they're like statues or deactivated colossus. Although that makes them killable without detection. Etc etc. You can also make unforcefieldable ground by using the new bridges with the cliff level feature over level 0 terrain (holes) which you can't cast FF on (or creep over) but are normal terrain in all other respects. You could imitate the footprint type they use and make any other cosmetic touch to the same approach, e.g. alien lilypads over water.

For the record I never thought of burrowed ultras and it's so sick idea.



On January 03 2013 18:38 Samro225am wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 03 2013 10:12 EatThePath wrote:
On January 03 2013 08:57 TheFish7 wrote:
I really like the use of winding paths to make close spawns more even and viable. But now I am wondering, doesn't that also have the effect of making your 4th base really far away? I am glad to see that you have demonstrated how you can use paths like these to control the distance between areas. This is especially cool for a 4-spawn map which have been relegated to cross spawn only primarily because of the distances you inevitably end up with.

For a map that's too small for adjacent spawns, the only option is to have all paths go through the center or the extreme edge of the map in a loop, buying more distance with zigzags or diagonals. This tends to either make a boring "it's the middle, stupid" type of map, or a map with extremely isolated areas. Or both, as here.

So far this has been avoided for the most part in SC2, but I think at this point in the game's life it'd be more acceptable than previously.


it can be done without crazy paths. With some extra size it should not be a problem.

the long paths create awkward situation where in the end you have a one-path map, where most action goes from base to centre to base.

Well, I don't mean that the paths have to be "crazy", I was just generalising the (basic) observation that in order to increase ground distance between vertical and horizontal spawns, you must create obstructions that typically lead to a diagonal path that simply must be either through the middle or along the edge.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
althaz
Profile Joined May 2010
Australia1001 Posts
January 04 2013 06:21 GMT
#36
On January 02 2013 20:17 Semmo wrote:
Map Name: [M] (4) Apollo

Published in: US, HOTS BETA

Playable Size: 144x144

Overview:
[image loading]

Comments:
All spawns enabled.
Feedback welcome.

- Center base ramps with burrowed ultras, you can't block with one FF.
- Center has 4 ridges. Up and Down.

It's hard to comment on balance as I haven't been playing Hots very long (and I've just been messing around for the most part), but third base seems wicked-hard (not as much for Zerg) to defend because of the direction the ramp faces. Other than looks pretty interesting.
The first rule we don't talk about race conditions. of race conditions is
FlyingBeer
Profile Blog Joined June 2012
United States262 Posts
January 04 2013 08:04 GMT
#37
What's the distance from the natural's ramp to the third's ramp? Antiga Shipyard and Shakuras Plateau have similar features, but on both, the ramp is much closer. Is blinking possible from the third to the main? And in how many places? Tal'darim Altar and Whirlwind have the same issue of short air from third to main with a long ground distance but both make up for it by being large maps, and I don't think the ground vs. air difference is as large as it is here. Tal'darim and Whirlwind also features large ramps vs the small ones on this map. So you've got several features that favor 2 base air play more strongly than any maps in current competitive usage.
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
January 04 2013 09:42 GMT
#38
On January 04 2013 17:04 FlyingBeer wrote:
What's the distance from the natural's ramp to the third's ramp? Antiga Shipyard and Shakuras Plateau have similar features, but on both, the ramp is much closer. Is blinking possible from the third to the main? And in how many places? Tal'darim Altar and Whirlwind have the same issue of short air from third to main with a long ground distance but both make up for it by being large maps, and I don't think the ground vs. air difference is as large as it is here. Tal'darim and Whirlwind also features large ramps vs the small ones on this map. So you've got several features that favor 2 base air play more strongly than any maps in current competitive usage.

I wish there was more feedback like this in the map forums.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
January 04 2013 10:47 GMT
#39
On January 04 2013 17:04 FlyingBeer wrote:
What's the distance from the natural's ramp to the third's ramp? Antiga Shipyard and Shakuras Plateau have similar features, but on both, the ramp is much closer. Is blinking possible from the third to the main? And in how many places? Tal'darim Altar and Whirlwind have the same issue of short air from third to main with a long ground distance but both make up for it by being large maps, and I don't think the ground vs. air difference is as large as it is here. Tal'darim and Whirlwind also features large ramps vs the small ones on this map. So you've got several features that favor 2 base air play more strongly than any maps in current competitive usage.


8~9 Seconds.
You are right about the air. It is one of the first things I thought of when I made the map. I definitely think one must invest more in air defense on this map - I hope this favors more skilled players.

You cannot blink from third, although this could change since I may enlarge the main.
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Semmo
Profile Joined June 2011
Korea (South)627 Posts
January 23 2013 08:16 GMT
#40
Map Update:
[image loading]
- Mains Enlarged
- Aesthetic Changes. Also on the 12 o' clock and 6 o' clock ramps, rocks has been added to show that it's unforcefieldable.

[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]
Mapmaker of Frost, Fruitland and Bridgehead
Prev 1 2 All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 19m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
NeuroSwarm 172
StarCraft: Brood War
GuemChi 2997
BeSt 199
Mong 194
Leta 90
HiyA 47
Shinee 34
ZergMaN 30
ToSsGirL 29
Mind 29
NotJumperer 11
[ Show more ]
Icarus 8
Britney 1
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K905
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox513
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor147
Other Games
summit1g6687
C9.Mang0272
ViBE49
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Rush1499
• Lourlo1428
• Stunt554
• HappyZerGling65
Upcoming Events
GSL
1h 19m
Wardi Open
5h 19m
Monday Night Weeklies
10h 19m
WardiTV Team League
1d 5h
PiGosaur Cup
1d 17h
Kung Fu Cup
2 days
OSC
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
KCM Race Survival
3 days
WardiTV Team League
3 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
KCM Race Survival
4 days
WardiTV Team League
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
BSL
5 days
BSL
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-03-13
WardiTV Winter 2026
Underdog Cup #3

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
Jeongseon Sooper Cup
BSL Season 22
CSL Elite League 2026
RSL Revival: Season 4
Nations Cup 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual

Upcoming

ASL Season 21
Acropolis #4 - TS6
2026 Changsha Offline CUP
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
NationLESS Cup
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
CCT Season 3 Global Finals
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 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.