|
This is a precursor to a rush build I'm modifying from zvz to zvp (credit to aebriol), and exploits what I perceive to be a slight map imbalance in the PvZ matchup on one of the new 1v1 ladder maps:
Slag Pits
What is the imbalance?
The ramp's ledge is CONCAVE, not CONVEX. On the ramp for this map, both sides of the ramp ledge are slanted. For PvZ, this means that if you use 1 zealot to complete a 1-gate core wall-off, that zealot is exposed to 2 lings at a time, not 1.
Compare the following ledges of every 1v1 map to Slat Pits:
Xel'Naga Caverns
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cfntl.jpg)
Typhon Peaks
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/KU8hZ.jpg)
Metalopolis
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/64xzv.jpg)
Scrap Station
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/vJrWa.jpg)
Shattered Temple
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/1K75V.jpg)
Delta Quadrant
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/YXo2Y.jpg)
Backwater Gulch
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/xaEwl.jpg)
Slag Pits
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/G39i1.jpg)
Note that this ramp is a concave ledge, and not convex. This is essentially the crux of the issue.
Why is it so important in PvZ? Because 1-gate core zealot-wall is susceptible to 2 lings vs. 1 ling.
Consider the following replays:
 vs  Michael vs NoFilter ![[image loading]](http://www.topreplays.com/img/layout/download.png)
vs Michael vs Slapstick
vs Michael vs Kunnie
vs Michael vs Kunnie (2)
vs Michael vs wonkman (snapshot below from 4:53 game time)
![[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.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/v5k17.jpg)
In this situation, 1-gate core doesn't offer a tight enough gap for the zealot to fight 1v1.
Closing Comments:
As you, the protoss player in PvZ on Slag Pits, will you change your building placement to compensate for this?
Do you think it's an imbalance or just something different that should be adjusted to accordingly?
Personally, as a zerg player, I do feel this is a bit of a disadvantage for Protoss players on this map in this matchup, and could easily be hotfixed.
reposted on blizzard forum: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2186018804
|
Good catch, definitely a difference there. I would suggest submitting it to blizz.
|
On March 04 2011 12:37 A3main88 wrote:
Good catch, definitely a difference there. I would suggest submitting it to blizz.
It's worth noting that if you 1-zealot wall incorrectly, your zealot is exposed to 2 lings anyway. I posted here because I'm curious how this, in its current state, affects PvZ building placement on this map.
edit: posted it there as per your recommendation, but I hope to keep this thread open as well to discuss how the early game PvZ matchup might be affected, given this information.
|
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.
|
What's the difference between the Metalopolis screenshot and the Slag Pits screenshot?
|
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
|
On March 04 2011 12:58 daglivewire wrote:
What's the difference between the Metalopolis screenshot and the Slag Pits screenshot?
You can fit 2 zerlings in contact with the zealot, since the protoss wall off requires the zealot to only face 1 zergling at a time to provide infinity times the DPS.
If they leave a gap in between the gate and core can they have it 1 to 1 again? I think some people recommend that to prevent as many angles for 3 roaches to attack from. Speaking of 3 roaches every time i have played a protoss on the new map they 4 gate and I do the 3 roach rush, don't think I have lost yet.
|
On March 04 2011 12:58 daglivewire wrote:
What's the difference between the Metalopolis screenshot and the Slag Pits screenshot?
friend of mine mentioned that bottom metal also allows double ling, but none of the other positions do. Didn't know that... in the picture I posted of metal it is of bottom metal, so this affects all Slag Pit positions, and bottom Metal.
|
Lets hope they remove the map from the pool to fix it.
Then forget to add it in
|
Is it just one ramp on the map that has this problem, or all 4?
If it's all 4 ramps, then it isn't an imbalance.
|
It's not imbalanced comparing spawning positions, it's an inconsistency compared to other maps, an exaggerated example would be if blizzard added a map to the pool that had open flat ground from the main to the natural, instead of a ramp. Then there would be huge delicious terran and protoss tears for all zerg.
|
On March 04 2011 14:22 zergrushkekeke wrote:
It's not imbalanced comparing spawning positions, it's an inconsistency compared to other maps, an exaggerated example would be if blizzard added a map to the pool that had open flat ground from the main to the natural, instead of a ramp. Then there would be huge delicious terran and protoss tears for all zerg.
Yeah basically this.
|
On March 04 2011 14:22 zergrushkekeke wrote:
It's not imbalanced comparing spawning positions, it's an inconsistency compared to other maps, an exaggerated example would be if blizzard added a map to the pool that had open flat ground from the main to the natural, instead of a ramp. Then there would be huge delicious terran and protoss tears for all zerg.
I only remember zergs crying about Kulas Ravine, even if there was no ramp at all... but that was retarded, in my opinion
|
Surely you could use an appropriate placement of 3 buildings to create the desired effect? I mean, scrap station also requires 3 buildings...
|
Anyone else notice that you can get 2 units up before any sort of "threat" happens? If you can't hold off 2 lings with 1 zealot your fired. But really even if there are 200 lings it doesn't matter of the ramp, 1 zealot cannot hold off infinity lings, they are used to block scouting not to defend against lings while allowing you to move out.
Wrong reasons for thread is wrong reason.
|
it would take a lot of lings to take down that zealot.
|
ive actually been having great success with the high economy speedling aggression build outlined by kirix (however you spell his name) on this map and part of it is because you can break the ramp much easier/faster, usually befor the second sentry pops. after that many games are ez wins.
|
... give me some credit for explaining to you that it's worthwhile against protoss, and that some have been doing this for a couple of months.
And it does work, exact same build, on all maps. You just lose a few more lings which is a non issue since you have a much larger army.
|
On March 04 2011 15:49 aebriol wrote:
... give me some credit for explaining to you that it's worthwhile against protoss, and that some have been doing this for a couple of months.
And it does work, exact same build, on all maps. You just lose a few more lings which is a non issue since you have a much larger army.
yeah I didn't think to since I was just pointing out the inconsistency in the ramp/wall on slag pits, but noted the same.
|
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."
|
someone mentioned that you could just create a pylon or other structure wall to create the same effect as the 1-zealot wall gets from ledge, but this isn't the case:
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 (snapshot from 4:53 game time)
edit: just added this stuff to OP.
|
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.
|
On March 04 2011 17:58 aebriol wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
|
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.
|
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..
|
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
Slag is even more imbalance!!! you can siege from the low ground and hit the mains mineral line !
|
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 
|
Omg, just change the way you wall in.
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
I've losing a lot to this. Not blaming the map though
|
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...
|
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.
|
Saying anything about map imbalances is kinda useless. Just look at Blizzard's track record:
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.
|
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.
|
its nice to finally see a map thats imba for some race other than terran!
|
On March 06 2011 12:17 imbecile wrote:
Saying anything about map imbalances is kinda useless. Just look at Blizzard's track record:
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.
I pretty much agree with this, this "exploit" if you want to call it that aside this is a terrible zerg map. Very short rush distances unless you're cross position and even then it's extremely hard for the zerg to take a third. From what I understand a lot of zerg's are downvoting it (myself included). How Shakuras, a map that no one really complained about and everyone generally seemed to like, was removed and replaced with a map like this is mind boggling to me.
|
Yea this definitely needs to be fixed. A zerg can essentially mass lings at the beginning and kill you if you only have the 1 zealot at the time.
This map definitely makes me question blizzards ability to make good maps. The natural is far to wide open, which makes roach/ling all-ins so powerful. It is also way to small.
|
just a bump, I thought it is worth mentioning that after I practiced this with some friends, we came to the conclusion that if you just make a 2nd zealot, you'll be fine. You can also use a pylon to make an artificial 1-gap if you need to.
Between the sentry, 2 zealots and additional units slowly streaming in, it's not much trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
