| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/vk8K6.jpg) As you can see here, the zealot is taking fire from 2 lings at a time, as well as 2 drones from behind--even though he has created an artificial 1-gap ledge with the pylon.  vs  Michael vs wonkman ![[image loading]](http://www.topreplays.com/img/layout/download.png) (snapshot from 4:53 game time)edit: just added this stuff to OP. | ||
|
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
On March 04 2011 17:35 limonovich wrote: just proves how bad this map really is, joe map maker spent 5 minutes on it. next thing we'll hear blizzard defending this map and saying they allowed 2 lings to attack because walling off is "imbalanced." It really isn't a map issue to be honest. You can do the same rush on every map, and someone who doesn't properly wall off when scouting (ie: doesn't realize how all inish it is with such early pool and gas), will fall to it more than 9 out of 10 times. | ||
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
On March 04 2011 17:58 aebriol wrote: It really isn't a map issue to be honest. You can do the same rush on every map, and someone who doesn't properly wall off when scouting (ie: doesn't realize how all inish it is with such early pool and gas), will fall to it more than 9 out of 10 times. Well, it may not be an "imbalance" within the map, but it's certainly an imbalance within the map pool. I think Protoss should downvote this map unless this is fixed. (On bottom metal however, you can still fit 2 lings in, so that is an actual map imbalance within itself.) The cardinal difference though between doing it on this map vs. any other map is that the other maps depend on the protoss screwing up his wall, whereas this, there's nothing he can do to stop you from doubling (or tripling if you mineral walk) the dps on the zealot. | ||
|
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
On March 04 2011 18:01 michaelhasanalias wrote: The cardinal difference though between doing it on this map vs. any other map is that the other maps depend on the protoss screwing up his wall, whereas this, there's nothing he can do to stop you from doubling (or tripling if you mineral walk) the dps on the zealot. I disagree. It doesn't matter at all whether or not 1 or 2 lings hit it. If he didn't wall off, he is dead unless he knows the right response and does it perfectly. Especially with ghosting drones to minerals (which blocks buildings behind zealot untill they die). It hits before he can block you off with enough forcefields, or units, if he did a standard gateway / cybernetics core opening. It's a delayed rush that have the same properties as a 6 or 7 pool, and the same correct response. The thing is, when most Protoss scout it, they don't think it's that kind of rush (well somewhat), since it's so delayed, so they don't know that they should prepare for it in the same way. I've seen some good players (2? I think), that walled off when the rush hit, and managed to hold it off. Most try to block it by throwing down one forcefield, or build pylon to complete wall - which won't hold it since you'll nearly always be able to kill off cybernetics core or gateway fast enough. Some players will get out a voidray fast enough - they think - but when you haved killed off the nexus, and or all probes, it really doesn't matter much since you'll start 2nd queen at home when you see the stargate. So yeah, it makes it easier, but overall - the rush works against the same kind of players. Most protoss believe they are completely safe with 1 gateway, cybernetics core, 1 zealot wall. Just like many zergs love to 15 hatch on any maps (slightly changed vs protoss especially lately). Problem with this build, that makes it poor as a "real" alternative, is that if scouted and reacted properly against, you are so far behind that you can't win. Against poorer players on ladder, it works. At least unto low / mid masters on EU. | ||
|
DarKcS
Australia1237 Posts
 Z not being able to attack any P or T walloffs makes the game a stalemate until they go air or bust out and Z has to respond. Being forced to make more defence might buy Z more time, making the meta-game better if Z applies pressure. The bigger wall-off needed directly from a Zerg's point of view is a GOOD thig in terms of game balance, not Q_Q balance.Kind of sick of every T/P thinking they can do whatever they want behind their $100 wall due to its efficiency. Sorry if I'm rambling but yeah. This doest' really matter in the end because it's just one map, so you have like what 1/15 chance of getting the map + needed ZvP matchup.. | ||
|
ThisIsSparta_
Austria39 Posts
On March 04 2011 12:58 Turbo.Tactics wrote: Well you can run in with 6 lings (suiciding 5) if he exposed his zealot to 2 lings at a time so I guess I'll just make 3 rounds of lings and scout his base on that map. I don't think it'll effect the matchup in general because this map specific thingy. It's just nice toi have imo its nice to have 1-2 lings in your opponents base, because if he wants to do something cheesy, like 4 gate, he has to kill your lings first and so you can delay his tech. last time i played i stayed in his base until the 7 or 8 minute mark and he was chasing me like a madman ( i had fast speed up). he was so confused that he even forgot to block his ramp, so more lings came in. its a way to scout a 4 gate easily and then you can react properly. i think its definetly worth it. | ||
|
ThisIsSparta_
Austria39 Posts
On March 04 2011 18:35 DarKcS wrote: Well how is a $100 unit holding off $400 worth of lings for 20 seconds not imba? lol Z not being able to attack any P or T walloffs makes the game a stalemate until they go air or bust out and Z has to respond. Being forced to make more defence might buy Z more time, making the meta-game better if Z applies pressure. The bigger wall-off needed directly from a Zerg's point of view is a GOOD thig in terms of game balance, not Q_Q balance.Kind of sick of every T/P thinking they can do whatever they want behind their $100 wall due to its efficiency. Sorry if I'm rambling but yeah. This doest' really matter in the end because it's just one map, so you have like what 1/15 chance of getting the map + needed ZvP matchup.. <3 so true awesome post | ||
|
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
On March 04 2011 18:35 DarKcS wrote: Well how is a $100 unit holding off $400 worth of lings for 20 seconds not imba? lol Z not being able to attack any P or T walloffs makes the game a stalemate until they go air or bust out and Z has to respond. Being forced to make more defence might buy Z more time, making the meta-game better if Z applies pressure. The bigger wall-off needed directly from a Zerg's point of view is a GOOD thig in terms of game balance, not Q_Q balance.Kind of sick of every T/P thinking they can do whatever they want behind their $100 wall due to its efficiency. Sorry if I'm rambling but yeah. This doest' really matter in the end because it's just one map, so you have like what 1/15 chance of getting the map + needed ZvP matchup.. My point was, this has nothing to do with map imbalance. The all in is just as powerfull on nearly all maps, simply because it doesn't rely on that to work. | ||
|
eVolvE342
157 Posts
| ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On March 04 2011 12:57 Geovu wrote: I honestly wonder if any Toss' haven't veto'd this map yet. It's just so bad that it is silly, and this is just one of the reasons. I kinda like it  | ||
|
Elean
689 Posts
It's not an imbalance issue that needs to be fixed by Blizzard. What needs to be fixed is your ability to adapt... Pretty sure you can still wall in like that http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=194363 And there are probably a dozen other ways to deal with it. | ||
|
Figgy
Canada1788 Posts
On March 04 2011 18:35 DarKcS wrote: Well how is a $100 unit holding off $400 worth of lings for 20 seconds not imba? lol Z not being able to attack any P or T walloffs makes the game a stalemate until they go air or bust out and Z has to respond. Being forced to make more defence might buy Z more time, making the meta-game better if Z applies pressure. The bigger wall-off needed directly from a Zerg's point of view is a GOOD thig in terms of game balance, not Q_Q balance.Kind of sick of every T/P thinking they can do whatever they want behind their $100 wall due to its efficiency. Sorry if I'm rambling but yeah. This doest' really matter in the end because it's just one map, so you have like what 1/15 chance of getting the map + needed ZvP matchup.. I hope this is a troll post? Without that zealot blocking your 400 minerals of lings the protoss outright dies. So does the Terran if he doesn't 2 rax and get a bunker. Lings have the highest dps of any unit in the game and the fastest speed. That combination early game = dead workers. There is a reason every protoss on the planet walls off when they aren't proxy gating. | ||
|
methematics
United States392 Posts
| ||
|
ch33psh33p
7650 Posts
On March 05 2011 09:29 methematics wrote: Is this the reason i got fucking 6/7 pooled like 5 times on this map today. Its annoying as hell but its a free win. No, this isn't talking about a 6/7 pool. Its talking about a delayed zergling timing attack with 26 lings. | ||
|
Volka
Argentina410 Posts
| ||
|
f1ve
Italy2 Posts
On March 04 2011 14:54 Daniel C wrote: Surely you could use an appropriate placement of 3 buildings to create the desired effect? I mean, scrap station also requires 3 buildings... Of course you can, but rush distance is not that long like in scrap station, i think you can't warp your third build and zael in time... | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On March 04 2011 12:57 Geovu wrote: I honestly wonder if any Toss' haven't veto'd this map yet. It's just so bad that it is silly, and this is just one of the reasons. Only race that shouldn't veto this is terran, those siege tank shenanigans on this map are too freaking hard to deal with. | ||
|
imbecile
563 Posts
The asymmetry on scrap station that made especially ZvZ biased to the top position were known and complained about since the beta, but blizzard instead chooses to change the smoke curtains on Metalopolis, something no one ever complained about, to make them full circle, something quite a few have already said to not like. I mean if they change the map anyway, why not do something useful like remove close positions? The short rush distances on Steppes were complained about since the beta especially for Zerg, but the map is kept for the whole time only to be replaced now by Slag Pits with even shorter rush distances. Shakuras Platau generally one of the most liked maps because it favors macro play is removed for exactly this reason, instead the rush fest Slag Pits where there are not even real 3rd bases is considered a macro map by them. Delta Quadrant, one of the most consistently downvoted and abusable maps in tournamants and ladder is still in the pool. | ||
|
lindn
Sweden833 Posts
On March 04 2011 17:35 limonovich wrote: just proves how bad this map really is, joe map maker spent 5 minutes on it. next thing we'll hear blizzard defending this map and saying they allowed 2 lings to attack because walling off is "imbalanced." sometimes i'm astonished how stupid people in this community can be. | ||
|
tenordrummer
Canada36 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs EffOrt
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
OSC
The PondCast
CranKy Ducklings
Maestros of the Game
Serral vs herO
Clem vs Reynor
[BSL 2025] Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
