EPTCould someone please explain what each race can exploit in a map, and how this is visible in current league maps? I play terran, so I kind of know what I like for them, but I'm clueless as to what zerg and protoss favor in map design.
Map imbalance, what aspects favor what races?
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Carthage
105 Posts
Could someone please explain what each race can exploit in a map, and how this is visible in current league maps? I play terran, so I kind of know what I like for them, but I'm clueless as to what zerg and protoss favor in map design. | ||
|
deverlight
Korea (South)463 Posts
1) Long rush distances -- This allows the zerg to power drones safer and defend by reaction instead of preemptively having to keep a comparable army. 2) Open space -- Zerg units just aren't designed to clash with other armies head on. Zergs need space to flank and surround for their armies to be effective. 3) Easily accessible third -- Zergs have always relied on staying one base up compared to their protoss and terran counterparts. Maps that have illogical third bases that are far away and are difficult to defend tend to favor terran and protoss because it's so easy to deny the zerg his third base. A two-basing zerg is usually pretty far behind a two-basing protoss or terran. I feel as though almost none of the maps currently in play incorporate any of these aspects. The only one I can think of as being alright is scrap station... and zergs love that map for the above reasons. | ||
|
neohero9
United States595 Posts
Open naturals, like on Kulas, can be hard for P to keep. I don't know about the other races on this point. Easily-walled naturals are awesome for P in the PvZ matchup. BS, LT, Scrap Station, and if properly executed, Steppes. | ||
|
3clipse
Canada2555 Posts
Edit: On the flip-side, Kulas is murder. Glad I can exclude it. | ||
|
Harrissprt
United States23 Posts
 I feel like I'm always dealing with tank drops, and I think its hard to counter. My favorite map is probably blistering sands. I'm not sure why, I suppose I just feel really really comfortable on it. I like the choke after the natural. | ||
|
Fimbulwinter
United States24 Posts
Love blistering sands, metalopolis, Xel'naga caverns... but would like to see some more open maps with less obstacles. I also wish they would remove the debris from the obvious natural in delta quadrant. It just sits there, taunting you saying "hah, you silly zergs and your 14 hatch". | ||
|
deverlight
Korea (South)463 Posts
On August 10 2010 15:09 3clipse wrote: I don't understand why more zergs don't like Desert Oasis. I always feel like I'm in control on that map and can choose to either be aggressive with mutas or safely power with no static d as I can create a large army in the time it takes my opponent to travel across the map. I'm 6-1 on it as far back as my match history will show me. Edit: On the flip-side, Kulas is murder. Glad I can exclude it. I actually don't mind Desert Oasis... the biggest issue for me is the location of the expansions. They seem a little bit too far for them to feel safe. It takes a lot lot lot of creep tumors to link my main to my natural to my third. | ||
|
Scruff
Singapore509 Posts
| ||
|
McCain
United States187 Posts
| ||
|
Ndugu
United States1078 Posts
That way, Zerg can defend the choke to their main and their natural simultaneously. After that, being able to expand in directions away from their opponent. Think Metalopolis closs-air positions. With Toss and Terran it really depends too much on specific build. Small chokes as McCain said (first good thing he's ever said!) and maps without back doors. This way we can depend on force-fields to split armies, meaning we can tech with a much smaller army. Terran probably likes to be able to divide the map in 2 in late game with a mech army. A straight line where they could slowly advance their tanks/other slow-ass Terran units being the unrealistic ideal. Also, spawns where there is LOTS of open-space. So Void Rays cant escape from marines. | ||
|
Carras
Argentina860 Posts
thats what a swarm should do.. adapting 1 or 2 base is the other way to go.. but i prefer map control and attakcing left n rigth with super imba fast zerglings | ||
|
NeoLearner
Belgium1847 Posts
An easy third away from the opponent so you can play your macro advantage. A back door. Big mains so you "could" Nydus or drop. An open center making flanking possible, maybe with LoS blockers. Some conveniently placed unpathable highground to place your overlords in optimal scouting positions. More important than making it Zerg favoured is to limit the advantage of siege tanks. Don't make the natural cliffable. Make sure there are multiple routes to the opponents base. Don't place reaper ledges at the mineral side. Don't make a big high ground next to the entrance to the natural,... Common choke for natural and main I don't know about that one. You could FE easily, true. Then again, your opponents could also FE in that case, potentially putting you behind again. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 10 2010 15:12 Fimbulwinter wrote: As zerg I like to add desert oasis to the /dislike pile. It has the negative aspects of the kulas ravine high ground except its around your main instead of the expansions. Also encourages fast air, which is a personal dislike of mine. Love blistering sands, metalopolis, Xel'naga caverns... but would like to see some more open maps with less obstacles. I also wish they would remove the debris from the obvious natural in delta quadrant. It just sits there, taunting you saying "hah, you silly zergs and your 14 hatch". Desert Oasis is an odd map for ZvT. The fact that all the expansions are open means that its extremely easy for Terran to harass them. But the fact that they're so spread out means that it takes a long time for Terran to go to each of them and kill them. | ||
|
Entropic
Canada2837 Posts
On August 10 2010 15:52 NeoLearner wrote: For Zerg I would like: An easy third away from the opponent so you can play your macro advantage. A back door. Big mains so you "could" Nydus or drop. An open center making flanking possible, maybe with LoS blockers. Some conveniently placed unpathable highground to place your overlords in optimal scouting positions. More important than making it Zerg favoured is to limit the advantage of siege tanks. Don't make the natural cliffable. Make sure there are multiple routes to the opponents base. Don't place reaper ledges at the mineral side. Don't make a big high ground next to the entrance to the natural,... Common choke for natural and main I don't know about that one. You could FE easily, true. Then again, your opponents could also FE in that case, potentially putting you behind again. Wouldn't a backdoor make it hard for Zerg to FE against 2gate and/or 4gate? | ||
|
archon256
United States363 Posts
On August 10 2010 15:28 Carras wrote: adapting 1 or 2 base is the other way to go.. but i prefer map control and attakcing left n rigth with super imba fast zerglings Attack where? Both Terran and Protoss can wall off their ramps and safely turtle up till your pesky lings aren't much of a problem. You just need 4-6 lings to assert "map control" at that early stage of the game, but it's nowhere near as (effectively) aggressive as you seem to think it can be. | ||
|
NeoLearner
Belgium1847 Posts
On August 10 2010 15:57 Entropic wrote: Wouldn't a backdoor make it hard for Zerg to FE against 2gate and/or 4gate? Potentially yes, but on my blistering sands games the backdoor always seems to hurt them more than it does me. It seems that a lot of Toss fear that backdoor so much that they all 2 gate FE all Tester like. | ||
|
SpiciestZerg
United States154 Posts
| ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
The wide open spaces in the middle are excellent for surrounds though, but I never seem to have the appropriatly sized army. Conversly the opposite is more or less true for the opponent, however. You can really abuse mutas on the map to harass expos, and you can overlord drop your army for hit and run attacks against the main. I don't think the map is particularly imba, I just think that it requires a different mindset to play. | ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
On August 10 2010 16:10 SpiciestZerg wrote: All the factors related to zerg have been covered. So what factors make a map imba for one side or the other in PvT? For PvT I find it very heavily favors blink stalkers/collossi and tank pushes because of those ledges. 2 and 4 gate are still hard to stop while dedicated MM pushes are hard to stop on your expos too. I do like TvT on that map more because it's very amicable to dropship play and tank pushes are much harder. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
As a zerg player... ZvT Zerg Advantage +Long rush distances - Long distances in this matchup give you more reaction time and more time to ambush mech in motion. It harms the effectiveness of some timings and strategies, but overall I'd say it helps Zerg more. +Open spaces - Wide open spaces help you use banelings or ling flanks more effectively. +Destructible rock backdoor - A destructible rock back door really helps to open some mid-game harass by the zerg +Expansions away from the opponent. These are easier to defend without actually being sealed off. +3rd Expansion that creates medium/small defend distances. Steppes of War, Metalopolis, and Blistering Sand type 3rds are good for zerg. They're somewhat open, but also have a short defend distances for zerg. +Short distance from nat to ramp. If creep can reach the ramp for good spine crawler placement it's a big help to zerg's early defense vs hellions or an early bio push. +Alternate paths. Having choices in path to the enemy helps zerg (eventually) flank and come down on the enemy Terran as well as opens up more possibilities for run bys and harassment. Can go both ways Wide open Naturals - It's somewhat harder to defend hellion harass on wide open naturals and a bio push can be trouble some. On the other hand ling runbys are more effective as is infestor play. This might really be a small Terran advantage, but I'll put it as both ways. Large Mains - It's nice for Zerg to get drops or nydus worms in, but Terran has good drop defense (sensor towers) and the ability to drop themselves of course. Terrain level changes with wide ramps - Terrain changes with ramps mid map (blistering sands for example) can mess with zerg creep spread. You have to have vision at the top of the ramp to spread the creep further and sometimes you have to put a tumor at 1/2 distance to get it to spread to the top of the ramp. At the same time they're usually great for placing mech (though this has more to do with cliffs and sides). The counter to this is that banelings/lings and other zerg mobility can really make use of line of sight disruption to get good flanks and positioning. Grass - Grass is in the same boat as wide ramps. The one difference is it's easier to get creep to spread around and offers less advantage to mech positioning. This is a slight zerg favor I suppose, but it still can go both ways. Watch towers with vision on the main path, but off to the side or far out into the middle. It's helpful to zerg to have xel'naga towers in a spot that's poor to defend, but has vision of the main path to spot incoming pushes. It helps them prepare and position defenses. At the same time if there is a reason to defend this area and mech gets up to it then it's really tough to dislodge them from that area. Easy to take gold expansions - Can go both ways. On some maps like Blistering I'd say it helps out zerg more as they're more likely to get a 3rd while Terran is on 1/2 bases. On a map like LT it favors Terran because it's easier for them to get and they can then drop a bunch of mules on it for super economy. ZvT Terran Advantage +Short rush distances - Allows for better harass and mech/thor pushes. +Wide ramps - Makes Terran slightly more vulnerable to baneling busts, but really the more important this is it prevents queens or roaches from effectively being able to block a ramp. +Xel'Naga watch towers that help to defend attacks (think LT). If the xel'naga towers are close to the main/natural it's easy for mech to get out to them. If those towers also help to cover attack paths to a 3rd AND the natural (like LT) then it makes them a devastating weapon against the zerg. Mech in this position can offer superior defense that's incredibly hard to dislodge. +Edges - Not just the top of a cliff, but any wall or edge helps Terran. The more the better. Edges help Terran to place mech in better positions and potentially help to limit Zerg's possible attack arcs. +Chokes - Choke points are hard for Zerg to deal with wherever they appear on the map +Island expansions - Much lower cost for Terran to expand to an island than a Zerg +Areas that can't easily be walked to - Droppable cliffs favor Terran due to Thor drops or other long range units that can take advantage of a cliff. Cliffs covered by destructible rocks count here as well, but for slightly less. +3rds or expansions blocked by destructible rocks from outside the main/natural area - Favors Terran because zerg relies on lings early on usually. lings (and mutas) take incredibly long to knock down such rocks. Meanwhile marauders or tanks will tear through them. In addition early game when zerg is in full defense mode it's difficult to find time to safely down rocks. Rocks like Steppes that are in natural's area or Kulas are easy enough to deal with for zerg though. +Naturals/3rds that are in base. 1 Ramp 2 bases, enough said. +Lots of exposed cliffs on main/natural. Good for reapers, bad for zerg. The exposed cliff can also be exploited by siege tanks or other units. +Closed off 3rds. By the time a zerg takes a 3rd it's defense against harass isn't as much of an issue. What is an issue is the ability of Terran to take a 3rd. Closed off 3rds help terran to take and secure the 3rd. LT is a great example of this where Terran can take the 3rd with a small choke and only have 1 point of defense. wooo that was long. I'll add more to this and include ZvP later. | ||
| ||
