EPTThe awkward third base - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
coddan
Estonia890 Posts
| ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
at bw and starcraft 2. in starcraft 2, it doesn't matter how many probes are mining until you reach full saturation. if you want to take a 3. base, you would need around 60-70 probes to fully saturate it. the starcraft 2 mineral / gas gathering system doesn't really support multi-basing. also the 6 workers needed for gas. if you want the additional income from a third base, you have to produce an obsurd amount of probes. if you got 60-70 probes @ 3 bases, you got a fucking tiny army, especially if you have units like colossi (6 supply rofl wtf, or immortal 4) it's not only the maps that have to change, also the mineral / gas gathering. keep that in mind please. | ||
|
FuRong
New Zealand3089 Posts
OT: I think this is closely related to map size. On a lot of maps the position of what would be your third is very close to either your opponent's third or his natural. And because a lot of the maps only have 8 bases total on them, it's not like you can try to sneak a hidden expo over on the other side of the map. | ||
|
kyarisan
United States347 Posts
| ||
|
Warlock-X
Canada37 Posts
| ||
|
revy
United States1524 Posts
Blistering Sands - I find it's easiest to sim city block in your natural, break your backdoor rocks and use that as your main entrance. Then the most natural third is the non-gold nearest to you. You can fairly quickly move between your 3rd, your main, and the blocked path natural. From there I generally push to the gold nearest your opponent for the 4th, if the game goes that long. I don't think this is a very awkward 3rd. Jungle Basin - I don't find the middle third a problem here. It's close to your opponent, yes. But you want to have your troops in the middle anyway, it's natural to take your third in the direction you push. The logical fourth is the one which is connected to your natural. Xel'Naga - This map has a nice easy 3rd in the gold or the non gold near you. Yeah you have to break rocks but is that really such an issue? The gold is in the middle of the map, where you want your army to be and having your army here secures your fourth as well. Scrap Station - This I agree with you, I don't much like this map you can't really consolidate a safe area with your army like you can on other maps, the "back door" rock passage always poses a threat. Couple that with close air positions and I really think that maybe I'm misplaying this map. Steppes of War - This one also makes sense, the natural third that they give you leaves you open on two fronts, but at the same time it is still possible to defend both. It's as you say, awkward. Lost Temple - Cross map as you said is easy. Close positions there's no way around moving to a new main. I agree with your assessment here. Metalopolis - Again as you said, cross map and close air there are natural 3rds. Close ground you really have to play an aggressive 2 base to try and take your third right between you. All the while you have to keep scouting a big map for hidden thirds. Shakuras Plateau - Agree with your assessment, easy 3rds abound. Delta Quadrant - Here I disagree with you again. I think the natural back third coupled with the more open natural play nicely. Throw in some low ground 4th options (1 of which potentially protecting the natural back third if you spawn cross posns or clockwise from your opponent. I don't see breaking some rocks as a big ordeal, do it slowly with just a few units well in advance of when you intend on taking your third. After reading your post again I didn't realize people don't take the front door expo as their natural. Always seems to me to take way to long to break the rocks for a natural. Yes it's more open but a defensive building or two, some map awareness and staying defensive it's an easy enough natural to secure. The third as your rock "back" expo is a piece of cake if you take it as a 3rd. | ||
|
mnck
Denmark1518 Posts
But I feel it's a valid discussion in regards to the map. But I also think so many have just recently got used to 2-basing that it will take a while before more standard transitions are decided, and when to time the 2nd expansion. Taking a 3rd is easy once you find the correct strategy to do so. But I play the OP Zerg race, so what do I know  | ||
|
Th1rdEye
United States1074 Posts
On January 07 2011 23:10 pullarius1 wrote: I had such an awkward third base until my second girlfriend. Just gotta practice, dude. + Show Spoiler + Zergs always get to third base. haha hilarious.. but in all seriousness.. I feel like I have a hard time getting a third base sometimes, as I am a zerg user. Even games where you think you're safe... its hard as F to hold a third... the maps with hard to reach thirds are a blessing and curse for a zerg player. Considering how hard it is just to beat a 2 base opponent that's P/T..... i don't mind its not as easy for them to take a third either. However, I don't really think that's true, because both races are very adept at turtling and once they get their third its usually GG for me.. zerg is hard enough. anyone who thinks zerg is OP obviously havent actually tried them, and should work on their own weaknesses as protoss/terran because when both are played flawlessly and sometimes non-aggressively, they become near impossible to beat. I'm 2800 so I know a tinny smidgen of what I speak. | ||
|
AnodyneSea
Jamaica757 Posts
| ||
|
wowsukz
Netherlands58 Posts
easy third base? cmone. Dont get lazy wtf is this. Next topic will be something like: "when will blizzard make maps with islands only?" | ||
|
BouBou.865
Netherlands814 Posts
| ||
|
LoLAdriankat
United States4307 Posts
On January 07 2011 23:16 idonthinksobro wrote: have fun in the bronze league, or you play terran. How cute. A new poster trying to be an elitist and contributing nothing. It seems that Starcraft 2 is designed for long two base play. Have you guys watched the in-house Blizzard tournament finals that Day9 casted? That pretty much explains everything. Dayvie, balance designer and top 200 player, rarely takes a third and when he does, it's pretty late into the game. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On January 08 2011 01:09 LoLAdriankat wrote: How cute. A new poster trying to be an elitist and contributing nothing. It seems that Starcraft 2 is designed for long two base play. Have you guys watched the in-house Blizzard tournament finals that Day9 casted? That pretty much explains everything. Dayvie, balance designer and top 200 player, rarely takes a third and when he does, it's pretty late into the game. You can't say "hey look at this player he doesn't do X thus the game is designed not to do X". That's ludicrous. In fact this is the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
So you could build up a defense line and have one half of the map. and no one dared to push because it would cost alot. Up until the spell casters arrived which could force movement against the overpowered siege units ^^. There is one map designed that way in sc2 and its steppes of war, so funny that one of the smallest maps is one of the best macro maps hehe, well the map seems a bit problematic for toss though. And it surprises me how many zergs like shakuras as i think its strongly terran favored. With only one ground way the others protected by rocks and so of the track and three expansions so close together you can defend them with one pack of siege tanks. Might not like all the maps in the pool but thats the point of this pool, it has a huge variety of different maps, that play completly different. And this is obviously for balance testing as well. But it allows a lot of diversity in play, that people neglect though ^^. edit: also try to compare your income with 60 workers scattered on 3 bases and with 60 on two bases not counting gas | ||
|
Touch
Canada475 Posts
On January 08 2011 01:14 Numy wrote: Why? It's perfectly valid. If top ranked players do not take a third, there must be a reason, which is explained in the first post.You can't say "hey look at this player he doesn't do X thus the game is designed not to do X". That's ludicrous. In fact this is the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. | ||
|
Smigi
United States328 Posts
But really, their have been so many threads regarding that the maps are huge issues ect. We don't need anymore threads telling us the maps are bad, or its killing sc2, or the third is awkward. Its widely accepted that these maps are bad in all aspects. I've heard ICCUP has tried to negotiate with blizzard, but failed? I'm not sure if thats true. Regardless we need to help iccup, it can't JUST be iccup that pushes blizzard. For the love of god, everytime i look at steppes of war I think i'm playing 1v1 bloodbath. We as a community need to rise up and tell blizzard what we want, ICCUP can't do it alone. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On January 08 2011 01:22 Touch wrote: Why? It's perfectly valid. If top ranked players do not take a third, there must be a reason, which is explained in the first post. That's a completely different situation. The poster I quoted said David Kim did not take a 3rd in some random in house tournament thus the GAME is not DESIGNED to have quick 3rds. Yet the first post talks about how maps are pigeon holing 2 base play not that the game is designed for 2 base play. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On January 08 2011 01:23 Smigi wrote: We as a community need to rise up and tell blizzard what we want, ICCUP can't do it alone. IMO the best way to do this is to play ICCUP custom games, if Blizzard starts to see them becoming more popular than ladder, they will probably react. | ||
|
sOAvoid
Canada206 Posts
| ||
|
Gingerninja
United Kingdom1339 Posts
| ||
| ||
