EPTZerg New Ladder Map Pool - Page 3
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Tropical Bob
United States127 Posts
| ||
|
Fallians
Canada242 Posts
| ||
|
envisioN .
United States552 Posts
| ||
|
TheRabidDeer
United States3806 Posts
tal'darim because i get annoyed with cliff cheese from zergs (burrowed infestors launching IT's from lowground) and terran, also because of how easy it is for protoss to deny a third and that as a zerg you cant really take the true third location abyssal because its abyssal shakuras because my playstyle sucks for that map, and i have a hard time securing a 4th. Also, its one real attack path so terran has a ridiculously easy time denying creep and places to attack. | ||
|
FairForever
Canada2392 Posts
On November 08 2011 12:37 envisioN . wrote: I'm really surprised that Tal'Darim Altar is the 3rd least liked map. I was under the impression that zergs liked big maps with lots of expansions. Tal'Darim Altar isn't very fun for ZvZ, and I guess some people don't like playing ZvP on it either. On November 08 2011 12:08 Fallians wrote: I really hate how all the supposed ''zerg macro maps'' have destructible thirds, when a protoss or terran can get a a fast second along with the zerg and the zerg cant really do anything for a good 5minutes. Zerg is supposed to be up a base unless I'm mistaken, and allowing lets say protoss too get a quick second while you can only work off two as well makes 6gates and other 2base timings alot harder to defend IMO. And if they aren't doing an all in, a macro game against P/T 2base vs 2base is extremely difficult. As for my veto, im debating on whether or not to veto XNC, as for the other I haven't decided. I think this is a myth. You can very much play on even base with Protoss/Terran, at least for moderate periods of time (obviously if you're always same # of bases as Terran you'll probably lose). The only case I can think of where I go "damn I wish I could take my 3rd earlier" is on Tal'Darim (another reason why some Zergs don't like it), if the Terran goes CC first or goes 1rax expand. I typically will grab a fast 3rd against this response (occasionally I'll baneling bust to keep Terrans honest) but you can't do this on Tal'Darim. This would also be a problem on XNC except no one 1rax expands on that map lol. Even against a reactor hellion fast 21 CC opening I'm very okay with getting a later third, as long as I can keep droning up my first two bases and build a macro hatch for extra lings against a possible marine/tank push. On November 08 2011 03:15 Jojo131 wrote: I'm quite surprised at the XNC vetos, def not one of my favorite maps but it always seemed like one of the more balanced ones too me imo. Just might think of taking it out just to see what its like. Not sure how "taking out a map" will give you a sense of what it's like, since you won't be playing it  It's tough to break down the Terran's gold Third (I saw July do it vs Morrow at NASL Season 1 Finals though), so you have to play aggressive 2-base play. For me, I veto Abyssal Caverns and Nezarim Crypt, because everything else is still playable at MLG and whatnot so I do want to keep practicing, even if I don't like Xel'Naga Caverns in particular (every other map I'm okay with). | ||
|
JiR
United States50 Posts
On November 08 2011 05:55 Tropical Bob wrote: I haven't decided yet whether I dislike Xel'Naga or Shattered Temple more. shattered temple was easily worse then XNC for me before the close spawn fix... but now im ok with it | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
Against Terran, split map vs split map just sucks, and ST leads to that too easily. In ZvZ it's too hard to do ling runbys when it becomes ling/muta vs ling/muta, so people just both turtle up to ultralisks. I also strongly dislike Abyssal Caverns, I vetoed that first thing last season. When it's close spawn and Terran just PF's the shared third, that just fucking sucks. On close air they just 2 base siege tank push into your damn main, and both P/T can elevator/cliff abuse/blink you into oblivion on close air. Close ground is just a little too close for comfort, and in general on the map, even on cross positions, a fourth is rather hard. So I just veto those 2 maps. I am strongly considering veto'ing XNC, it's straight up imbalanced against Terran, but only slightly, it's not too bad. It's not like Abyssal where you can get gayed over and over or ST which you are disfavored all game long. XNC has some nice features too - lots of air room, map control means a lot, and FFE is discouraged (although fast third is discouraged too). I just can't wait for the day when there's actually a zerg favored map. So far it's just been for zergs "meh i can play there" I'm not Zerg player but in my opinion best map for Zerg in new map pool is Abyssal Caverns or Xel Naga Caverns. Xel naga is very good for 6pool rushes and another cheeses who is commonly used in Gold-Platinum leagues. Abyssal Caverns is hard to XvZ (without mirror) because 2nrd is very hard to defend against Zerg. In 3rd we got 2 medium entries with rock. If we save rocks we got very easy to attack 2nd entry to 3rd. If we destroy rocks we got nwe entry to 2nd. Sorry for my bad english ;/ let me enlighten you then. 6 pool is horrible at the top level. It's a straight up build order loss to everything. In ZvZ, hatch first, 10 pool, 8 pool, 14/14, they all beat 6 pool. In ZvP, it only works if Protoss goes nexus first, but now protoss know to scout the zerg base before doing nexus first and if they dont scout that soon (like 4 player map) they make forge then nexus (any 1 base build is lol against 6 pool). Against terran, they just bring 1 scv from mineral line to repair, gg. At the lower levels though, 6 pool works because people don't follow build orders or they simply aren't aware of how to respond. I don't know why you think 6 pool is good on XNC, I think most zergs prefer 6 pool on 4 player maps because it gives a great chance the opponent doesnt see it coming, but with 1 overlord one direction, and a drone scout on 7 another, they can figure out where you are. In Abyssal the 2nd is quite easy to defend, I don't know why you say it isn't, and I don't know what 2 base build zerg is going to do besides some obvious all-in. I'm not really sure what you mean, but I basically said why it's a horrible map already. Zerg wants the ability to take a third (it isn't necessary, but if the third is hard to take at least give us the option to take either a riskier third on a map with large distances so we can at least defend it by playing perfectly, or make it so the natural is hard to take for the other races), a 'slim' main that they can scout with an overlord reasonably (like many of the new maps have, like Nerazim Crypt), at least medium sized rush distances (close spawn on Abyssal, for example, is too short even with rocks), a map that isn't easy to just split in half for the other race to just turtle up with static D, open areas for engagements, bases with lots of chokes that make it extremely hard to attack with forcefields and then at the same time extremely hard to defend due to aggressive forcefields, less cliff/ledge abuse for elevators/blink (like main/natural/third on delta quadrant for blink or the old ridge on Lost Temple or even worse was that weird huge 4 player map that the game shipped with, river something), late-game bases (bases 5,6,7) that aren't completely impossibly far and departed away or as equally closer to the enemy as far away from yourself, a possible 4th base, room for mutalisk harass behind bases (this also allows us to be dropped, so makes for dynamic games), less rocks, the possibility of counter-attack routes, and a map where our third isn't fucking 2 paces next to the opponents third and is extremely far away (scrap station was sooo bad). In general, descructible rocks make our life miserable too. In short, we want it so if the natural is easy to take for others, then the third is easy to take for us, a third and fourth that isn't super far away, hard to get, or shared/next to the opponent, reasonable map distances, no chokes in stupid places and possible open areas to engage, no stupid easy cliff abuse, no island bases, no rocks, no golds, and we dislike split map situations because we will always lose them. Yea, the way zerg is designed atm means the best map for us is the plainest. Go good game design! | ||
|
JiR
United States50 Posts
| ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
| ||
|
JiR
United States50 Posts
| ||
|
Vod.kaholic
United States1052 Posts
On November 08 2011 17:45 Belial88 wrote: I don't mind FFE at all, I just think it's ridiculous when Protoss can take their natural no problem, and then zerg isn't allowed to take a third. If you put rocks on the third base, then there should be fucking rocks on the natural. Tal Darim is fine because it's large and you can take a third elsewhere. I don't mind if the third is reduced (like Crevasse or Terminus RE) or is slightly more exposed like on Taldarim, as I am aware it does cause issues if the third is too easy to take (im not sure for who or why though... i just know there was a good reason they added rocks on GSL Tal Darim when it didn't have rocks to begin with). Well, from what I understand of the current metagame, protoss FFE is the standard, and a fast third (around 4-5 minutes) for zerg will generally crush FFE by outmacroing the protoss by the time he decides to move out. I honestly think that easy to take thirds are a real nightmare for PvZ with a forge FE opener, and the more maps make thirds harder to take the better. But there's a balance that has to be struck between EASY third bases and DEFENSIBLE third bases, at least from a PvZ FFE standpoint. Easy thirds are generally the kind that are not blocked by rocks directly, and defensible thirds are generally the kind that are closed off environmentally (old Terminus) or the kind that help you defend along the line of attack and provide some kind of cover for your other bases, or the ones you can easily walloff without being abused from a high ground. Indefensible thirds are the kind that are are very wide open, or the kind that require you to pull your army out of position to defend, leaving your other bases vulnerable. I think that in a PvZ FFE scenario, if zerg is given easy thirds, they actually don't have to worry about the defensibility of it until later in the game, assuming they don't outright crush protoss's first attack with the macro advantage gained from the 3 fast hatches. So because FFE gives up a lot of potential for early game agression, it makes easy thirds for Zerg much more defensible because zerg has time to get up a much larger army than the Protoss and can afford to defend more easily due to their macro advantage. On the other hand, highly defensible thirds, regardless of how easy (read: blocked by rocks) they are, favor protoss because it makes it easier to macro off 3 bases for a nice unit mix without worrying about zerg's mobility abusing the protoss ball on the defense or when it decides to move out. Good maps for this are ones where erecting a gateway/cannon wall on one side of the base leaves the zerg with one "open" path of attack that leads into your natural, where your army should be. Good maps for this are Metalopolis and Shakuras: think of the lowground third by the watchtower and the back third, both are easy to wall off and defend because an army in the middle defends both the natural and the third. I think Shakuras is really an alright map from this perspective because it lets both races play to their strengths in an FFE scenario. Tal'darim is a little wonky because the space between the natural and the third doesn't contain a separating ramp (both bases are the same elevation) which means you can defend one base with your army and the other with forcefields as easily as you can on Shakuras, where your natural's wallin is at the ramp. So yeah, this was kind of a long-winded rant on the types of bases and how they work out in PvZ FFE games. TL;DR: Defensible bases are great for Toss, Easy bases are good for Zerg, good maps let each race access its favored type of expansion. | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
Yea good point :/ those rocks force you to waste larva on units to take down the rocks, and therefore ur behind on drones, but I do see zergs go for the close spawn nat, saw it on stephanos stream yesterday, Id think its easy to defend... id have to try it more to be sure how effective it is. On ST, it's pretty far away and hard to defend :O. It's not like Tal Darim where at least the map is very large, and the third for protoss is even easier on ST (although it's pretty easy on Tal Darim too). You can defend it, but it requires pretty perfect play to do so, and you can't guess wrong on what the opponent is doing if you are unable to get that scout off. On tal Darim you have time because of map distance and it's easier to scout with an overlord on that map. I suppose it isn't all that different, the problem I suppose is more so the split map situation, cliff abuse for protoss on your main, and impossible to deny third/fourth gold for protoss. Well, from what I understand of the current metagame, protoss FFE is the standard, and a fast third (around 4-5 minutes) for zerg will generally crush FFE by outmacroing the protoss by the time he decides to move out. I honestly think that easy to take thirds are a real nightmare for PvZ with a forge FE opener, and the more maps make thirds harder to take the better. With perfect play and perfect scouting, yes, fast third will crush FFE generally. This is changed because of impossibility to perfectly scout, less than absolutely perfect play, and if the third is easy to take for protoss. I don't think the fast third should not be allowed to be taken, because it's dynamic and it's a real nightmare for ZvP with a FFE vs 2 base. FFE vs Fast third is much more balanced than FFE vs 2 base; 2 base lair is actually behind, and should always lose but sometimes you can catch a protoss off guard with mutas or infestor timing (but 2 base muta or infestor is a really, really bad build, like 4 gate is). I think the third should either be slightly exposed to encourage aggression and hard for protoss to take (a full minable third on ST is ridiculous) or make the third easy to defend but less fruitful in minerals (fast third generally doesnt take more than 4 gas until they are on 4 bases anyways, and protoss would be hurt too much if it was less gas). I don't think rocks are a good idea though. XNC is a good example though, of a map that both denies FFE by being super wide open (roach/ling all-in will always beat FFE on that map, for example) and denying a fast third reasonably. You can still do it, technically, so more game options leads to more dynamic play, but it's pretty much impossible to take due to rocks blocking the path to it. There's also ICCUP testbug which doesnt block the expo, but rather the minerals (dont know if that is that much better though, just a little better). | ||
|
JiR
United States50 Posts
| ||
| ||
