|
Hello everyone. *waves* My name is Lucian and I think Starcraft is awesome!
Since my friends and I had gotten into SC2 our first impulse was to make a team to play together and without hesitation that's what we did. Meeting up a couple times a week to play games is a lot of fun. We have noticed a couple things though. Looking around the net for strategy, builds, even video tutorials or replays of 3v3 games hasn't yielded a lot of results. There just seems to be so little information about it out there. Reading through TL, ROOT, and bnet forums hasn't done a lot for us either. There's a lot of tiny tidbits but nothing really compiled or organized. We're really looking to up our game, but haven't found a place to go. Since TL is awesome and was the first fan site I came across when I got SC2 I figured this would be the best place to ask about it. Who else here plays 3v3s?
The maps have been driving us crazy. Here's what I think about them.
Monsoon is terrible. Monsoon's shared base layout means if one person gets broken the entire team is suddenly at risk. There is also only a single gold expansion on either side of the map. Being stuck with only two bases puts a very hard cap on the time you have to win and doesn't leave much room for doing anything. I feel very restricted and vulnerable playing on it.
Ulaan Depths has some similar problems. There's a main/nat for everyone then a single gold expo at the north and south sides of the map. The difference from monsoon is that the bases are separate and each player has a ramp to wall off at. Two of the ramps exit toward each other while the third is further away by itself. Individual bases are made only slightly safer by being solo with ramps. The issue with that is multi-army pushes against the isolated base being difficult to defend and reinforcing the attacked player is sometimes futile because of the unit advantage they have from their combined armies. It's pretty good still.
Arakan Citadel is another shared base with two expos in it blocked with destructible rocks. There are many expansions on this map, two of which are golds, and an additional two are mineral-only golds. This map is good to play on except that the main base is very wide open and has a lot of avenues for drop or air play. Our losses are always due to air on this map because of the excessive ground distance AA units need to cover to defend the far corners of the base. There is also a large area behind for flyers to move out of reach of static defenses. Not such a big fan of this one due to all the aerial punishment. We don't know whether to try and get air units first ourselves or to build mass AA on ground.
Quicksand is awesome, but I can see where a lot of people would dislike it. It's extremely small and doesn't quite have enough naturals for all players involved. There are three gold expos close to each other in the center. Games on this map are very chaotic and fast paced. A lot of early rushes seem to occur. It's laid out like a pizza with destructible rocks connecting the slices near the crust. Things happen very quickly on here, but that's how I like to play anyway so it suits me rather well.
Bio Lab is another map I really enjoy. Separate mains with shared naturals and two ramps leading up. The mains can be walled with two buildings and by combining armies and defense the naturals can be held easily. There's a fistfull of expansions on this map as well which includes two golds. Similar to Arakan Citadel air is very powerful on this map because of the paths between the different mains.
Frontier is another map I like. There are plentiful expansions including two islands and two golds. Mains are separate and have two ramps leading up to each one. It's difficult to defend early pressure on this map because of the two ramps. Each main is also susceptible to drops because the minerals sit a good distance back from their opposite edge.
Colony 426 is another map I enjoy like quicksand, It typically plays fast and is relatively short. The mains are separate and strewn about the map with two in the middle. I like how the mains are split it and dislike it at the same time. It's easy for a combined army to catch another by itself and ruin it. There's three ground attack channels and the middle player's bases are vulnerable to air.
Dig Site I like a lot. It has expansions, separate mains, and is pretty big. I've got no complains about it and play my best on it. I wish I had more to say, but it's hard to identify what makes it play so well for me.
Typhon is a map I feel is very well made on paper, but somehow seems to fall short in actual use. Shared mains and naturals in a very wide open area with a wide ramp at the front and a path behind covered with destructible rocks. The distance between naturals from the two halves is very short by air. Air harass and drops are particularly effective here. There's a handful of expansions at the bottom including two islands, but it's difficult to expand to them when under pressure because your entire base is connected as one giant blob that's hard to step away from safely. It's so big that covering ground distance from one side to another to defend a multi directional push makes it a real headache.
Strategy is a whole other monster. It's just bizarre or maybe I simply don't grasp it yet. I'm still comparatively new to SC2 and RTS games in general, but I read more than I play usually.
Triple same race teams? Race combinations are completely lost on me. My first reaction was to say TPZ and take one of everything then call it "good", However after playing a while I've noticed that triple of the same race is powerful in that it lets you use all possible tech paths. Protoss can have one person go mass gateway units, another mass stargate, and another handles robo tech. Terran get bioball, mech, and air. Zerg get well... zerg seem to always be able to spawn whatever is most convenient at the time due to how larva works so they just get really scary when in massed. I think that's more psychological than anything. Infestor baneling muta harass roach hyrdra is something I saw once. normally that series of words should never be together. Triple zerg also lends to a nasty early triple 6 pool to try and get someone out very early then someone gets banes and the other go into spire/hydra/roach.
One of everything is what we happened to play today. We've generally been playing whatever race we want and changing around occasionally. We're having a difficult time splitting up the tech when being different races. In a one of everything setup the easiest long-range attack to get is terran tanks. Collosi and Broodlords take much longer to get. Terran and Protoss seem to have the easier to obtain anti-air units with the viking and phoenix. Zerg and protoss seem to dominate ground to ground with speedlings and zealots. Lings can contain units until the slower zealots can catch up and put on the hurt. Medivacs work well with gateway units because they can heal zealots and templar. combined with guardian shield it's very strong. Works great with roach/hydra or zerg air too. We haven't done too much experimenting with cross race unit comps, but we're working on that.
Rushing or tech'ing is a question we never know the answer to usually. Should we attack with two armies while the other techs? Doing a triple rush with ZZT speedling, baneling, marine has performed well. However defensive macro play with the same comp was also strong. Most of our losses are due to the other team pooling all their of their armies and then slamming one of us into nothingness then using their then-overwhelming numbers to kill the remaining two armies without difficulty due to numbers superiority. It feels difficult to get back into a 3v3 game because there's more enemy players to worry about sniping your base during the rebuild. In 1v1 and 2v2 it's easier to cover a rebuild, but in 3v3 and 4v4 it just takes one member of their team to take it out leaving a fair size behind still.
When do we quit? It's sometimes difficult to know when we've lost or are going to lose shortly because of the multiple players. I've seen a crippled team pull off an absurd victory before. In 1v1 it's easy to tell when I've lost a game, but in 3v3 it seems harder to discern especially with the resource and unit control sharing within team games.
Who else out there actively plays 3v3s? My friends and I would love to hear about this seemingly less talked about mode of gaming which we enjoy very much. Have you played a particularly awesome game? Tell us about it. Post a replay if you've got one. Know some strategies? We wanna hear about those too and I'm sure we're not the only ones. What do you think of the maps? Maybe someone likes Monsoon. I'd love to hear someone defend that map or trash talk Quicksand. Do you have a favorite race comp? Maybe you just hate 3v3s all together. We'd like to know why.
Let's talk about 3v3s.
|
Day9 Daily #210 Youtube link BlipTV link
He talks about 2v2 but everything he talks about is applicable to 3v3 and 4v4. I did my 4v4 and 3v3 random placement matches and got put in silver. After watching this daily I did my 2v2 placements and got placed in platinum. It's a pretty good video about how to defend and when to attack in team games.
|
I'm a fan of Day9 and that video did help a lot for some basic overall stuff, but 3v3 is still different from 2v2 in a way I have trouble putting into words. The idea of "die as slowly as possible so your ally can tech and build" doesn't work as well because three armies are harder to defend against then two armies. Somehow it's always the same guy regardless of where he spawns or if he gets scouted or what ever race he plays. Gets triple teamed and wiped out or he gets triple teamed loses a crippling portion of his stuff then our remaining two armies show up and defend it costing us his base and all 3 of our armies. If we don't pull to defend his base gets wiped before we have time to really "Tech" or build anything meaningful. In 2v2 it's a smaller atttack force.
It doesn't touch on the maps either. We're having huge problems on Monsoon, Ulaan, and Typhon. The themes from that video have definitely helped out. I want to refine it more though. thanks for linking it. That is an amazing video to watch for understanding differences between 1v1 and teams.
|
The biggest change I've noticed in 3v3 from 2v2 is the talent level increases significantly. My team is generally comprised of silvers (either silver zerg, silver toss and gold terran, or bronze and gold terran and silver toss, depending on whose wife won't let them play that night), and we're bronze/silver in 3v3 (generally play a couple hours on Friday and Saturday nights, but that's it). Most of our games are against random teams that are usually platinum and diamond (surprisingly enough, we lose most of these :O).
The two strategies that have worked the best against us are heavy harassment from one or two players while the remaining player(s) does a fast tech, and early zealot, marine or ling pushes (especially on quicksand). There have been some early cannon rushes and stuff like that, but not as much as I would've thought, and we can usually do pretty well against those.
Generally, we try to do a big push around 7:30 with PT, and our zerg does some speedling harass into muties. It's effective against players close to our skill level - we haven't found anything that diamonds won't crush (big surprise).
Map-wise, we're much more effective with a shared main.
|
Yeah i think there needs to be more of a discussion about team games. The 1v1 emphasis whilst i understand is almost fanatical in its nature with many users here. As for the maps well lets just say you are completely correct. However in team games it is as day9 demonstarted that it is much more effective to take out 1 player to make the game a 2v3 (hence the split ramp games) but becuase the already 1v1 focused game takes precedent over everything else getting new maps isnt likely. Besides it would turn 3v3s into twilight fortress...stalemates until teching is done.
|
While all these strats for team games are somewhat important, the most important thing is the skill of the players that compose the team. If you guys have 3 silver players, don't expect to get to platinum with standard play. The most useful thing is having 3 players that all scout, macro, micro, and respond well. For example, if they're doing a big 6 minute push it's more useful for everyone on your team to see it, make units, and micro them well in the fight than it is for you guys to know these strategies that are being talked about. 1v1 skill almost always carries directly into team game skill, but it does not work the other way around. If you wanna get better at 3v3 just get better at 1v1
|
On December 31 2010 11:21 Wink and the Gun wrote:
The biggest change I've noticed in 3v3 from 2v2 is the talent level increases significantly.
I don't know about that. I'm Plat/Diamond in 3v3/4v4, but I'm stuck in bronze for 2v2. I keep going up against people with 500+ games (still bronze) who execute harsh double timing attacks while my ally is stuck wondering why his mass defensive cannon strategy isn't working.
In 3v3, there's typically two people who have a vague idea of what they're doing, and one guy who spawns in the center but for some reason thinks he can get away with rushing void rays while getting supply blocked every cycle. All you have to do is figure out who to crush first.
Macro is definitely very, very important in team games, arguably even more so than in 1v1. Even in Diamond 3v3/4v4, one player can get an army that destroys the armies of two or even three other players, and win the game basically alone (or with the help of some banshee/voidray/muta-rushing allies).
|
I think team matchups are very cool, If pro 3v3 players existed and played each-other I think the strategy would be at least as complex, the macro at least at challenging and the micro at least as important as in 1v1, the games would be awesome to watch,
Unfortunately there is one HUGE problem, the game cant be balanced in 1v1 and 2v2 and 3v3 and 4v4, and balancing all race combos in next to impossible after 1v1, at the same time higher player match ups are fun and definitely take skill, regardless of what anyone wants to say and there should be a place on these formus for discussion of it
BTW I never play anything but 1v1 but I don't really have friends who play starcraft at my level and I hate being at the mercy of random teams
|
if you want to win in 3v3, then just work out your strats so that they are fairly safe vs cheese, and pick a time in the game to attack, and just build up toward that point so that you have the biggest possible army at that point in time. For instance, a terran going 3 rax and attacking when stim/combat shields finished / combined with a protoss going 4 warp gate ( if he makes a bunch of sentries then they should have almost max energy by the time the t's stim/shields is done ) and a zerg could go 15pool and just shit out roaches until his allies are ready to go. It's a bit risky to do this though, if your opponents decided to play even cheesier then you could be in trouble. Something like 2 gate zealots + 11\13\15 3rax + 14g 13p into mass banes could be pretty good
|
Thank you for the suggestion drewbie. Builds have been a plague mostly because the opposite team likes to push our protoss player very early, but not the zerg. The zerg seems easier to wreck since they can't wall although he does occasionally get the push instead. We're really not sure what to do about that or why it happens. This is for separate bases obviously. When together it's different.
Edit: I forgot how adverbs work, but I fixed it.
|
I'm diamond 3v3 random. I've played mostly 3v3s with two friends and our team is #1 in our plat division. We started at bronze during placement. We're usually ZZT sometimes ZPT.
In the 3v3 early game, I think it's better to be on the offensive since you can initiate the attack with combined armies while the other team's armies have to gather to help. Our general strategy is to make units and push at 6 minutes to take out one guy. With decent scouting we usually find the most vulnerable target. One z is speedlings, other z is roaches, while T is marines. It's important the the T marines stay behind the roaches and sometimes we share control. the speedlings is for run-by when other team leave their base to come help his ally. Early expand builds are very risky in 3v3 as it's hard to defend 3 armies. If one guy walls-in completely and tech to VR/Banshees/DTs it might work, but at highly levels it's not as effective as when everyone in the team has an army by 6 or 7 minutes.
We use to do shared control attacks with all 3 armies but find that it wasn't as effective once we got in plat. We found that it was better for the team that we each controlled our own armies and so that we all were able to get better at roughly the same rate. Also there were no confusing when two people were fighting for control of one big army.
Midgame, the speedling Z techs mutas while the roach Z adds infestors, terran gets medivacs for drops. We usually push to stop expansions while securing more of our own.
Late game, it's thors, mutas in mass and ultralisks. To be honest, most 3v3 don't last this long. We usually starve the enemy out and win with late mid-game push.
Hope this helps
|
Team games are usually one team rushes and the other team techs up.
I'm usually on the team that techs up so I prefer to stick to 1v1. I get tired of getting frustrated at my teammates.
|
3v3 players are usually not that good at macro games and usually rely on ill-timed pushes (AT teams time them sighly better than RT though).
For instance, as terran you usually have time to get tanks out before they arrive.
Most of the time, once you handle that initial push and get rid of the incoming cheese (usually DT or Banshee), you shouldn't avec much trouble winning the game as long as you don't forget to macro properly yourself (getting enough expansions and so on).
|
My friends and I do team games all of the time, and were diamond in most all of them
i think one of the biggest thing that helps us is that we skype while playing.
the easier communication makes things so much easier to coordinate, warn, and help other players, whether its attack or defense.
My friends and i also give each other share control, because sometimes your ally will notice hellions slipping in your main, or your army out of place.
as far as actual strategy goes. you want to act as one. That means dont have 2 people rush and 1 fast tech. because it will be 2 people attacking 3, you are really hoping that they just werent prepared for your fast banshees or w/e.
when you get to 4's theres a little bit more leniency when it comes to acting as one, because theres more flexibility. 3v4 is easier than 2v3
when your team expands, make sure you all expand in the same direction.
it will make defending your expantions a million times easier.
while Monsoon is all about breaking one, and the everyone is at risk, it just means you need to focus on holding the middle, its a map that really encourages aggression, so dont try and turtle up on this map
when one of you are about to get killed (3v1 and the 1 player is going to die) dont go for the save.
Have the guy that is going to die, run everything possible, and die as slowly as possible. i know how hard it is to die slowly as possible, but the longer it takes to kill you the better. if there is no escaping, Say your toss and all of your probes will die, gather as much as possible to give to your allies.
What your allies should be doing is 1 of 2 things
a) counter attack, this can sometimes even end up saving yourself. and at the very least make it 2v2
b) contain their army in your base, wait for a favorable time to attack. If he already has high ground, it would be bad to run 2 armies in a choke/ramp vs a 3 army concave
anyways, i hope this helps
and honestly, i think the best thing for team battles is skype with them
|
Use voice comm. It's a godsend for team play.
If you're the ones getting attacked, I think you're playing too passively. As ZZT, you should be pushing out well before your opponents decide to attack. One Zerg should go mass lings into +1 or banelings and then expand. The other should go Roaches and expand. Terran should go MM push or get tanks for map control. Hit earlier, your team should be the ones deciding when to engage.
As ZPT, you should still be aggressors. I'm diamond 3's as this composition. My Terran will go MM Stim or Marine tank. Zerg will go mass lings with +1 attack. As Protoss, I open 3-Gate expand. Our timing attack is centered around when Zerg is ready to push out. We're in position well before +1 is done, and engage right when it finishes.
Most 3's games end up as one-base pushes. One player get knocked out, and now it's a 3v2. If you harass in the early game, you delay this push and potentially throw people off their game. It's very important to pressure your opponents. This allows you to either get ahead in tech or economy. Scouting is also very important. So many players scout on 9, and then never think to check up on their opponents again. I laugh every time someone scouts my 4-Gate feint, and I'm really going 3-Gate DT.
|
|
|
While the team game strategy could be more complex than 1v1 strategy, its not even remotely close tot hat point yet. The best teams do a fast timing push and are able to take someone out, then beat up on the team with 1 man down.
|
I play a lot of 3v3's as random and also with mates. With my mates what we do is share control early and then send a drone each - normally to harass a terran dude while he tries to get supply depots or barracks up. If there are no terran then attack a pylon or bully probes. It can be very productive to knock guys off their stride so early in the game and watching the opponent send every scv he owns to benny hill you is quite satisfying.
Another nice trick with a protoss / zerg combo is to give toss overlord vision so he can warp guys into a base. You can catch people with their pants down with this. It can be a very good form of harass but shouldn't be considered a game ender.
I agree with the attck first philosophy, or at least have guys in one close spot so that your mate gets rolled while you are half the map away.
Random team mates are a mixed bag. Some spend the first 10 minutes making 100 photon cannons at their choke only to be dropped at the back 5 seconds later. Others gel really nicely and complement you.
I have to agree with the maps. Araken citidel I have thumbed down. It plays like a turtle map where people try to get doom armies while one guy annoys the shit out of you with mutas. Totally not my style of play. I also dislike typhon, mostly because I get caught with my pants down on it too often.
One downside, like you said is some tectics become a bit imba on small maps. A 6 pool is easy to hold off solo but 3 zerg opponents all 6 pooling will roll over one person irrespective of skill level. Add to that you normally then get your random team mate pinging screaming HELP!!! HELP!!!111ELEVEN!!! as 18 zerglings kill him while you have 1 marine. I have mixed feelings about this (happy it wasn't me they rolled and sad for my team mate!)
All in all I enjoy the team aspect. Sometimes it disappoints but when you get a good matchup it can be very satisfying.
|
I was playing in the morning and they decided to pair a bronze on my team... I didn't even think that was possible, his APM was between 20 and 30..
|
3s are such a joke, trying to play macro with it is nearly impossible
|
What I actually dread is in the beginning of 3v3s, one person disconnects on one of the teams so it suddenly becomes a 2v3, except that team with 2 active players gets increased income. Which is really different from a 3v3.
So suddenly that team is able to afford more units for themselves and they are able to concentrate their armies much more, while we have yet to take out that disconnected player's main. The problem is that the sharing of resources is instant and the alive players benefit immediately. This bypasses that 3 minute time limit in the beginning and so even though you're supposed to take out the disconnected player, it's actually really hard to take out that player. Particularly in random games where efforts can be uncoordinated.
|
I'm a diamond 3s player and my team plays triple random, we have a set plan usually on each map.
On two maps that you disliked, typhoon and citadel, we have the best records on.
Typhoon if anyone is zerg they early double expand while terrans/ protoss hold the front with a bunker or so just to discourage a timing push. The zerg then can mass up so many mutas to completely contain the opponents in their base while the two other players are free to do whatever they wan't throughout the map.
Toss players can also do strong pheonix plays on this map if there are any zerg / minimal terran.
Citadel i found a timing push at around 6 minutes is most powerful and can instantly win the game 80% of the time. This push is strongest with two 4 gating toss players and a terran. The only thing that I encountered that can hold this was seige tanks on the ledge.
|
My friends and I always play at the same location so we can talk throughout the fight. It's saved us countless times because one of us saw a nydus coming up and grabbed someone else's army to kill it before they themselves realized what was going on. This happens with drops and DTs too. Shared unit control and voice chat are two of the biggest tools I think in team games.
After reading through a lot of this I'm starting to feel that a strong timing rush can be very effective. When should we back off after that initial attack? Is it better to take out one player and retreat or in the case of maps with shared bases continue pushing?
When it comes to Monsoon, Arakan Citadel, and Typhon would it be much better to go air and turtle up the front? This impulsively seems to be a great idea for Typhon, but Monsoon and Arakan have multiple entry points that need to be defended on ground. Unlike Typhon these can't simply be sat on by all three armies. I feel they'd be more difficult to defend against a fast moving push because of the time it takes to reposition.
Thanks fighter2_40 for that post about Typhon. That's one of our tough maps.
|
On December 30 2010 22:59 VATO_Lucian wrote:
The maps have been driving us crazy. Here's what I think about them.
Monsoon is terrible. Monsoon's shared base layout means if one person gets broken the entire team is suddenly at risk. There is also only a single gold expansion on either side of the map. Being stuck with only two bases puts a very hard cap on the time you have to win and doesn't leave much room for doing anything. I feel very restricted and vulnerable playing on it.
Monsoon is one of those maps I either love or hate depending on my partners... Or rather it's a map I hate when any of my partners is a zerg. This forces that side to either has ve one player sacrifice economy or army to prevent a domino effect loss or to go into early aggression. If all players on your team are Protoss or Terran, it's a lot more enjoyable. Lack of Expansions is also something that hurts zerg play on this map.
Ulaan Depths has some similar problems. There's a main/nat for everyone then a single gold expo at the north and south sides of the map. The difference from monsoon is that the bases are separate and each player has a ramp to wall off at. Two of the ramps exit toward each other while the third is further away by itself. Individual bases are made only slightly safer by being solo with ramps. The issue with that is multi-army pushes against the isolated base being difficult to defend and reinforcing the attacked player is sometimes futile because of the unit advantage they have from their combined armies. It's pretty good still.
Ulaan Depths is one I HATE because of that far off main being so difficult to assist unless it's Protoss that rushed Sentry tech. If it's Terran, his wall is usually sniped putting him behind in supply, tech and macro. If it's Zerg, well I've played this map as Zerg and I can tell you that more often than not, my main frequently ends up at the 2 or 7 o'clock expansion as a result of a 3x Rush that knocks out few if any drones simply because I transferred them over when my drone scouted the first push.
Arakan Citadel is another shared base with two expos in it blocked with destructible rocks. There are many expansions on this map, two of which are golds, and an additional two are mineral-only golds. This map is good to play on except that the main base is very wide open and has a lot of avenues for drop or air play. Our losses are always due to air on this map because of the excessive ground distance AA units need to cover to defend the far corners of the base. There is also a large area behind for flyers to move out of reach of static defenses. Not such a big fan of this one due to all the aerial punishment. We don't know whether to try and get air units first ourselves or to build mass AA on ground.
Arakan Citadel is in my opinion is the most fun 3v3 map of the lot. You have a bounty of available expansions, 2 safe (Albeit slow expansions). The Mains can be walled off by 2 players effectively to secure all 3 bases + the 2 expansions (So having a Zerg player on your team doesn't royally screw you over). Ranged Units can further assist the chokepoints with high ground advantage with great ease. The downside though is as you say, Due to the nature of the geography itself, it does favor an air heavy mid and late game, and wall scaling units and drops are very powerful throughout the match... this means reapers, Colossi, Blink Stalkers, MMM, etc... Muta Harass is notorious against the In-Base expansions even if you set up a bunch of static AA simply because the Zerg being able to hide behind his team mates walls can safely rush to Muta Tech (He'll still make lings if only for breaking down the rocks but this makes them available for defense as well)
Quicksand is awesome, but I can see where a lot of people would dislike it. It's extremely small and doesn't quite have enough naturals for all players involved. There are three gold expos close to each other in the center. Games on this map are very chaotic and fast paced. A lot of early rushes seem to occur. It's laid out like a pizza with destructible rocks connecting the slices near the crust. Things happen very quickly on here, but that's how I like to play anyway so it suits me rather well.
I'll agree with you on this one, Quicksand makes me smile regardless of what race I play. While the rush distances are small, so are the reinforcing distances so in the time it takes for your opponents to half way finish breaking your wall as protoss or Terran, your team mates will easily come in from behind and crush them from both sides. If you're Zerg, throw up a fast pair of crawlers and grab yourself some early Roaches to try to hold your choke. If you are terran... PF a Gold gives you a good shot at transitioning into 2 base play where Protoss really stand no chance at securing an expo before mid-game. The nature of this map lends itself well to 1 Base plays, and the Protoss being at a serious disadvantage when it comes to securing an expansion typically play the most aggressive with 1 Base Fast Blink Stalkers + Colossi builds which really abuse this map. Every time I've played this map and a Zerg partner didn't auto-GG because a few lings and marines showed up at his main at the 5-6 minute mark, it's been a fun game.
Bio Lab is another map I really enjoy. Separate mains with shared naturals and two ramps leading up. The mains can be walled with two buildings and by combining armies and defense the naturals can be held easily. There's a fistfull of expansions on this map as well which includes two golds. Similar to Arakan Citadel air is very powerful on this map because of the paths between the different mains.
This is another one I've always enjoyed since like in Quicksand, Rushing one player usually results in your armies being caught in unfavorable positioning from behind by the partners... we're talking about a concave on both ends, while Fast Expanding before macroing up an army is also tremendously risky due to the nature of the Natural Expos area. The two golds are VERY risky since the expos themselves are on the bad end of the high ground advantage, while the 4 other Expos, while difficult, aren't impossible to defend due to high ground and the thin ramp leading to them from the naturals plateau. Granted the way the entrances are choked on this map makes Air play really powever, most notably against Protoss who walled up since even if they left room for units to squeese by, it's usually only Terran Marines and Zerg Hydras that will get through... and by the time they get through Mutas and VRs can move for about 5 seconds and not have to worry about being hit for another 20 seconds.
Frontier is another map I like. There are plentiful expansions including two islands and two golds. Mains are separate and have two ramps leading up to each one. It's difficult to defend early pressure on this map because of the two ramps. Each main is also susceptible to drops because the minerals sit a good distance back from their opposite edge.
Frontier: I love it. It's hard to keep track of all the expansions, and if scouted, it's not too hard to defend any but the island expansions. Reinforcing any one main doesn't take forever since the central main can be pathed through. There is just so much you can do on this map that it just doesn't get old... I mean, 3 Mains per side with 5 Natural Expo sites, one of which is gold and one of which is very secure. Many games I've played on this map resulted in T3 Macro plays with a lot of micro to abuse terrain or unit abilities. Air isn't grotesquely favored like on other turtle maps. Siege units have a lot of places to be placed, scouting is incredibly important due to the number of avenues you can push through. If there is a map I can call "Fast Based Macro" favored... this is it... and I love it.
Colony 426 is another map I enjoy like quicksand, It typically plays fast and is relatively short. The mains are separate and strewn about the map with two in the middle. I like how the mains are split it and dislike it at the same time. It's easy for a combined army to catch another by itself and ruin it. There's three ground attack channels and the middle player's bases are vulnerable to air.
Colony 426... I'll be honest, I hate this map. I hate how split all the mains are since it places heavy favor on 3v1ing the first player with rush builds and then 3v2ing the surviving players. I've never seen a game on this map go otherwise.
Dig Site I like a lot. It has expansions, separate mains, and is pretty big in the. I've got no complains about it and play my best on it. I wish I had more to say, but it's hard to identify what makes it play so well for me.
I HATE Dig Site... but it's got nothing to do with the map layout and everything to do with the fact that I always get stuck with mouth breathers for partners on this map. The most recent example was I cannon Rush-Contained the two terran bases at the bottom of the map and told my partners to use their rush built attack units to attack the isolated protoss player before one of the Terrans could tech tanks and slowly demolish my wall of Cannons... they instead stayed inside their bases with all their units to defend themselves from the "Inevitable Rush" for a full 15 minutes. The time before that, Me and a Terran player were about to throw down our first SDs when we noticed no movement whatsoever from our partner. We proceeded to send our workers on the task of demolishing our own bases, then waypointing them to attack the 3rd player's base before dropping from the match.
Typhon is a map I feel is very well made on paper, but somehow seems to fall short in actual use. Shared mains and naturals in a very wide open area with a wide ramp at the front and a path behind covered with destructible rocks. The distance between naturals from the two halves is very short by air. Air harass and drops are particularly effective here. There's a handful of expansions at the bottom including two islands, but it's difficult to expand to them when under pressure because your entire base is connected as one giant blob that's hard to step away from safely. It's so big that covering ground distance from one side to another to defend a multi directional push makes it a real headache.
I actually really enjoy Typhon, although yes it is one of those maps that favors air, there are enough ground approaches and short drop distances make ground heavier armies effective as well. The large size of the bases and the naturals plateau makes hidden tech plays viable as well. In one match I had 4 Academies hidden away throughout the main and wasn't caught by observers or a couple of scans until after I had already dropped all 4 Nukes on whole stacks of supplies for each player, scouted a player going for Mass VR play, and destroyed over 40 workers.
Triple same race teams? Race combinations are completely lost on me. My first reaction was to say TPZ and take one of everything then call it "good", However after playing a while I've noticed that triple of the same race is powerful in that it lets you use all possible tech paths. Protoss can have one person go mass gateway units, another mass stargate, and another handles robo tech. Terran get bioball, mech, and air. Zerg get well... zerg seem to always be able to spawn whatever is most convenient at the time due to how larva works so they just get really scary when in massed. I think that's more psychological than anything. Infestor baneling muta harass roach hyrdra is something I saw once. normally that series of words should never be together. Triple zerg also lends to a nasty early triple 6 pool to try and get someone out very early then someone gets banes and the other go into spire/hydra/roach.
I've personally found that all same race teams tend to be on the weak side. 3x Zerg usually means 3x 6-Pool though to be honest... and 3x Zerg gets wrecked by just one Protoss Opponent pumping out a few Sentries before mid-game. 3x Terran gets wrecked if there is one Zerg player who pumps out a grotesquely large number of Banelings early and relying on their partners to finish the non-wall buildings off while microing the banes against any other early bio units. 3x Protoss is crippled by one Terran teching ghosts or one Zerg teching Infestors.
One of everything is what we happened to play today. We've generally been playing whatever race we want and changing around occasionally. We're having a difficult time splitting up the tech when being different races. In a one of everything setup the easiest long-range attack to get is terran tanks. Collosi and Broodlords take much longer to get. Terran and Protoss seem to have the easier to obtain anti-air units with the viking and phoenix. Zerg and protoss seem to dominate ground to ground with speedlings and zealots. Lings can contain units until the slower zealots can catch up and put on the hurt. Medivacs work well with gateway units because they can heal zealots and templar. combined with guardian shield it's very strong. Works great with roach/hydra or zerg air too. We haven't done too much experimenting with cross race unit comps, but we're working on that. The one of Everything set up is strong on some maps, but as I've mentioned above, the Zerg player can be a liability on a number of maps. Generally they are great at shared bases (Arakan Citadel especially)and are generally written off if they spawn on an isolated base, and have to struggle with their own glaring weakness on maps with few or very risky expansion options or play to their strengths on maps with short reinforcement or rush distances. A Zerg who starts creep spread early on Quicksand is dangerous like you wouldn't believe! If you are going to play with Zerg in your team, have him practice his Speedling/Infestor Micro for those maps that zerg ache on, it really makes a huge difference if they can manage Speedling/Infestor on one base.
[quote]Rushing or tech'ing is a question we never know the answer to usually. Should we attack with two armies while the other techs? Doing a triple rush with ZZT speedling, baneling, marine has performed well. However defensive macro play with the same comp was also strong. Most of our losses are due to the other team pooling all their of their armies and then slamming one of us into nothingness then using their then-overwhelming numbers to kill the remaining two armies without difficulty due to numbers superiority. It feels difficult to get back into a 3v3 game because there's more enemy players to worry about sniping your base during the rebuild. In 1v1 and 2v2 it's easier to cover a rebuild, but in 3v3 and 4v4 it just takes one member of their team to take it out leaving a fair size behind still.
[quote]
My favored approach has been one player using a moderately safe rush build, another using a more mid-game Macro oriented build while the third does a tech rush. The player using the Rush build can poke the opposing bases and possibly scout pooled units, if its not to our liking, the tech rusher and the mid-game player can both adjust accordingly and usually get something out in time to out-do the opposing rush. If the rusher can get a free kill (Not often) or cripple one of the players, woot. With the Terrans getting out Stim/Shield Marines and Tanks has been pretty good for mid game while mass Thors if they are the tech rusher has proven quite solid. For Protoss, I've found that 3Gate Robo is solid for the mid-game player while 2Gate Blink Stalker/Colossi or Phoenix VR... or this one time I went Phoenix/Colossi are pretty good Tech rush builds. A Zerg player who is allowed to tech into BLs or Ultras often wins the game, while Mass Muta is pretty strong on the large shared bases maps.
|
I also wanted to mention that on Typhon, a 2 Probe Cannon Rush is ridiculously effective since the ramp is so wide that after your first probe scouts the building placement for the wall off, your second probe can slip through the blind spot between two buildings under construction while you suicide your scouting probe or let it be chased off by the early workers and let them see it leave while you start cannoning up at the top of the ramp leading to the natural. After you get a few 6 or so cannons up there, you can set up a pylon and cannon by their back door while your partners begin to break down your own back door and you begin teching up to warpgates. A very powerful opening.
|
I have had curiosities about team play fro some time now, would even like to see folks get together for regular team play league games.
However, for obvious reasons, I rarely play team random.
Maybe we could create a community for regular prearranged teams. I don't know how many could be interested, but there could be a few...
|
There's tons of strategy in 3's, IMO, and I find them really fun. the maps do need balancing, and you have to rethink how you deal with rushing vs macro.
As day[9] says, strats that are "all in" in 1v1 are really reasonable in 2v2 and 3v3, because you a) can gang up, making rushes stronger, and b) can expand after fairly "all in" plays and still expect to have time to recover and tech up.
Instead of thinking "whats the minimum I need to defend against 1 person rushing?" and macroing hard, you have to think "what do I need to survive a 3 on 1 rush long enough to give my allies a chance to macro or do damage."
With all this in mind, the best strats IMO are ones that use 3 rushes with similar timings, followed by an expansion, tech, and another timing push at 2nd tier.
For instance, in a TZP team, if z goes 7 roach rush, terran goes 2 rax marines, and protoss goes 4 gate, all 3 attacks will hit about the same time. You put pressure on one person, then expand and tech up.
I think the strategic depth of 3's is far greater than 1's if you have a co-ordinated team. However, because few top level players dedicate a lot of time to it, it isn't nearly as well understood or standardized. The greater complexity makes it almost impossible to master, so lots of players just write it off entirely.
|
3v3 is totally broken, in map or in balance.
Most of the 3v3 map zerg can't take their 3rd or even 2nd. Some of the map naturals is about 2 miles from the main. And if one team decide to do 6 pool x3, there is the auto lost specially with zerg.
|
One-base play.
In 3's, it's pretty hard to secure your natural unless your push was successful. Getting your third is next to impossible. Your first push should cripple or take out one of the opponents. Also, never underestimate the power of harass.
|
Medivacs heal allied zerg units... nuff said....
|
A couple of the above posts really highlight another problem. Some of the maps don't have room for expanding and it forces two base play. Also mentioned was zerg having nowhere to expand to and having played zerg myself I really feel that restriction. I'm not used to managing two-base plays and only two-base plays. I'm usually looking for the next step to take, but when there isn't one I get kinda lost. Can anyone offer some insight on what my goal would be instead of "find a third"?
|
On January 03 2011 13:34 VATO_Lucian wrote:
A couple of the above posts really highlight another problem. Some of the maps don't have room for expanding and it forces two base play. Also mentioned was zerg having nowhere to expand to and having played zerg myself I really feel that restriction. I'm not used to managing two-base plays and only two-base plays. I'm usually looking for the next step to take, but when there isn't one I get kinda lost. Can anyone offer some insight on what my goal would be instead of "find a third"?
Quicksand more or less forces zerg into 1 base play unless you get luck with the map positions.
|
IMO on most 3v3 maps Z+Z+T/P tends to dominate everything. Since the reaper nerf zerg have become incredibly strong in 3v3, protoss just dont have mobility to help team mates early game so they tend to be less effective.
Most games just tend to be massing units early game with a very well timed attack into 1 player cripples them to the point where they cant recover. Then one of your allies techs whilst you continue to pressure the other 2. Once your ally has teched and has the relevant tech structure (spire is probably the best tech structure for team games) you and your other ally can then pool him all your resources, this typically provides the killing blow to win you the game.
|
I hate any shared base map so I X them off but still get them. Mainly because I play RT and the MM is a joke (RT vs AT wtfffffff), well team games are kind of a joke as well but fun sometimes. I literally cannon cheese every game and it's so awesome because you don't sac any eco and can kill a player outright if not heavily damage his eco (other toss usually) as well as easily defending against lings (which are most commonly the units you'll get counter-attacked by) with one blocked in cannon + probes, with sentry follow-up if you think another attack is coming. It can transition well into standard play as long as you already have solid mechanics. It's pretty much the way I've ended up playing a team Toss on RT; they're immobility makes them pretty weak early game to Zerg especially. Yesterday, I just went on a 15 game winstreak cheesing diamond teams. I used to play a normal game, but you're kind of just flipping a coin on your allies.
|
3v3 really screws with me because you can't really "counter" what your opponent is doing. You just have to get some kind of units. I personally like attacking early off one base with your whole team. Just try to figure out a timing where everyone can push together, and go try to kill them. Unit control is important, because composition can be pretty wierd. You can't really build units designed to counter your enemy, because they simply have too many things to do at once. So just build an army of solid units and attack with them.
|
playing 3v3 is ok if the other team also has an interest in playing good games but so many times you just face things like 3 zergs with early pools; also i can understand that most good players arent attracted by teamgames simply because individual skill doesnt matter that much as macro and strategy is less important - even for me the only motivation for teamgames is to play with friends - an attractive 3v3 would require more good maps and a tool that forbids tripple civs in one team
|
My friends and I played some of our weekly 3v3 games yesterday and it went pretty miserably. We got thrown off game after game by players who just never changed their strat. In 1v1 the solution for that seems to be "just go kill him". In this case however we were dealing with separate groups of cloak banshees, flux rays, and battlecruises flying around the map on Dig Site. I can't count how many hyrdras I threw away defending two army's worth of units because one of our players got almost eliminated in the initial push.
Breaking air was just so troublesome. Especially when they got BM and took the islands to just stand there and waste five minutes of our time for me to spawn mutas/corruptors in large enough quantity to go take those out. Having to kill off hydras for supply sucked because I hate wasting larva like that.
|
I think APM is a bit of a joke. I’m not a great player but I’m diamond in all match ups and my apm average is at 50 most games. I don't understand why people spam apm its pointless. I find in team games t1 push at 5mins at 1 player works 80% of the time. Also expand while attacking and start to tech. Keep scouting and map control and its gg.
|
|
|
i stopped playing team games after one of my allies said
"im rushing to brood lords protect me"
|
I play 3v3 teams with a set team with 2 plat players. We are currently rank 2 in our division with about 1100 pts and a win loss of 64-23. When we started using a new strat we went 27-3 with it. It involves them playing Zerg and rushing to roaches. When the roaches, about 12 total, hit at 6 minutes, I straight go 4 gate and invest heavy on sentries and stalkers and expo. When we hit one guy I ff the ramp, all the while pumping probes. Throw down two robo to star getting colossi. Teammates feed me half their gas and transition to speedlngs or mutas. Works very well since we are on vent.
|
On January 07 2011 03:40 lalainyoureface wrote:
I play 3v3 teams with a set team with 2 plat players. We are currently rank 2 in our division with about 1100 pts and a win loss of 64-23. When we started using a new strat we went 27-3 with it. It involves them playing Zerg and rushing to roaches. When the roaches, about 12 total, hit at 6 minutes, I straight go 4 gate and invest heavy on sentries and stalkers and expo. When we hit one guy I ff the ramp, all the while pumping probes. Throw down two robo to star getting colossi. Teammates feed me half their gas and transition to speedlngs or mutas. Works very well since we are on vent.
You should try out Colossi/Stalker/Hydra/Muta + SLing and Zeal mineral dumps with the Hydra player dropping down a Nydus Network so that the hydras can be pulled back quickly to defend against air plays.
|
Yeah team games are a bit of a crap shoot sometimes and yeah maybe some combos are broken but a lot of the time they are just so damn fun! So much diverse action going on all over the maps. You get your fast paced quick shoot maps and you got your large scale management maps (that can still pack a swift punch in a well executed rush). You got your cheesers and you got the people that turtle. Yeah sometimes it comes down to what allies you get but so what half the fun is trying to do your best and make a difference for your team! It's always great when you see someone else pounding the enemy in while you're working your ass off too hard to notice most of the time! So nice to have more than hunters/BGH to play on too! :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
