EPTWhat does a zerg-favored map look like? - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
MoreFaSho
United States1427 Posts
| ||
|
whatthefat
United States918 Posts
On March 10 2011 17:27 Ribbon wrote: I've been thinking about this a bit myself. I think Scrap Station could be remade to be very Zerg-friendly, by having an easy third. Things that make Zerg happy.... 2. A backdoor natural. It the safest kind of natural there is! I used to think the same, but I'm now of the opposite opinion. A backdoor natural is actually much more favorable to Terran or Protoss. The reason for this is that a front natural actually improves Zerg's defense of his main due to creep spread. In a way it's the Zerg equivalent of walling. By contrast, a backdoor natural, such as on Jungle Basin, leaves Zerg extremely vulnerable to any cheesy aggression, since it is not possible to spine crawler the ramp, or at least limit the opponent to attacking one base. Meanwhile, Terran and Protoss can control their front ramp anyway, so a backdoor expansion is pure bonus. It allows fast expansions without the risk of a zergling runby and consequently less static defense. Add destructible rocks such as on Delta Quadrant and you have a Zerg's nightmare. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
One with no way to "wall in". 6-pool every time baby! But on a more serious note: 2 Player map with a super close natural and third. Lots of space behind for muta harass. No destructible rocks, and no "cliff hopping". | ||
|
CoMMoDuS
Germany507 Posts
i think that maps cannot favour zerg as much as the other races, because in my opinion they are unable to use cliffs to their benefit as well as the other races. changing neutral animals to ultralisks might make zergs early game alot easier though. | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
On March 11 2011 04:49 cLutZ wrote: Ultimate zerg favored map: One with no way to "wall in". 6-pool every time baby! But on a more serious note: 2 Player map with a super close natural and third. Lots of space behind for muta harass. No destructible rocks, and no "cliff hopping". not 6-pool, as that is meant to get there before the wall-in anyways, you'll want a 14/14 mass speedling build into roaches I think on a fully open map. | ||
|
MementoMori
Canada419 Posts
-a close natural which is closed in so a spine crawler can defend both the natural and the main -a large but not huge map -a very open middle of the map -a third base which does not require expanding towards your opponent I don't agree with the people saying that multiple entrances to the main always helps zerg. Blistering sands is just one way of doing that. That map was good for zerg at times because the defender had to walk farther than the attacker. Also keep in mind that if there are rocks for the enemy to break through, it really limits what zerg can do. 4 gates or heavy bio play early is much more of a problem because you can't rely on spines | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10383 Posts
| ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
| ||
|
tzenes
Canada64 Posts
On March 10 2011 16:55 stupidhydro wrote: I think, but correct me if I'm wrong, the point is that some people believe that maps just can't really be "zerg favored" and that maps that are "good for zerg" are ones that are just not unfavorable to them. I think this is an interesting point. A lot of people thought big maps and easy to take expansions, for example GSL Terminus Re, would favor zergs more but it turns out having easy to take expansions seems to favor terran and protoss just as much and that zerg macro without early pressure doesn't seem to be exorbitantly better than terran or protoss macroing up with the long rush distances either. Edit: well I'm a slow typer because the OP responded to the quote already but I agree with the response that I actually don't know what is really "zerg favored" either. I think the idea that there is no such thing as a "Zerg Favored" map arises from the low win rate that Zerg have been having in major tournaments (~45%). While this may be from any number factors, its still worth discussing what maps help Zerg (or hurt). To this end I've spend the time to assemble a listing of maps which are most (or least) favorable: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=tsdNUMXQu6hIurnQigHkGTQ&authkey=CMX1050H#gid=0 I also summarized my methodologies in a blog post. http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=200326 | ||
|
Nightfall.589
Canada766 Posts
Somewhat open natural entrance. Ramp to the main base located as far in the back of the natural as possible. Third tucked away in a secure location, so you don't need to expand towards the enemy. Very open middle area, few chokes. Water around the main base/expansion, for muta harass. No cliffs. | ||
|
Sirion
131 Posts
1 gas in main kills so many strategies by terran and toss, it is not even funny. Well, as a zerg player I giggle at the thought of banshees or sentry expand off of 1 gas. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
The rush distances should also be long of course, and there would be very little choke points such as narrow paths or ramps. islands are also not good for zerg generally. Generally, it would be a really damn simple and dumb map... Think big game hunters redesigned for 1v1, and with most or all of the water removed. On March 11 2011 19:30 Sirion wrote: What I did not see mentioned is a main with only one gas, and of course an open natural(with two gas). 1 gas in main kills so many strategies by terran and toss, it is not even funny. Well, as a zerg player I giggle at the thought of banshees or sentry expand off of 1 gas. But zerglings and roaches, zerg's main 2 low teir units, are both trash vs critical mass of any other low tier composition, like stalkers, zealots, marauders, marines, etc. Sure it makes terrans and protoss more predictable, and less able to use their fancy stuff, but they can just dominate with meat and potatoes. marauder-hellion would be absolutely impossible for zerg to deal with if there was only 1 gas on bases (it's strong enough as it is IMO). | ||
|
frucisky
Singapore2170 Posts
| ||
|
Highwinds
Canada955 Posts
| ||
|
Sirion
131 Posts
On March 11 2011 20:54 Xapti wrote: But zerglings and roaches, zerg's main 2 low teir units, are both trash vs critical mass of any other low tier composition, like stalkers, zealots, marauders, marines, etc. Sure it makes terrans and protoss more predictable, and less able to use their fancy stuff, but they can just dominate with meat and potatoes. marauder-hellion would be absolutely impossible for zerg to deal with if there was only 1 gas on bases (it's strong enough as it is IMO). Well, in my experience one can work with 2 geysers really well in the early game unless you want fast mutas. And one could add 3 rich gas no mineral thirds to support the gas-heavy midgame. But looking at typical games, zerg takes gas late, puts drones of gas, and sometimes takes a third before adding geysers 2,3,4. So I am quite convinced that a zerg on 2 geysers(main + natural) can deal with all 1-base plays from 1-gasing terran/toss. | ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
| ||
|
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
| ||
|
Sensator
Australia377 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On March 11 2011 23:12 Sensator wrote: Big maps with large chokes. Narrow chokes such as Slag Pits = forcefield abuse and tank abuse, and there's nothing Zerg can do about it. pretty much this : P | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
| ||
| ||
