|
A lot of people (zerg) complain that maps are unbalanced against zerg and that the map has a serious effect on the outcome of the game. Eg. close-positions Meta, JB, DQ.
From what people have said from both sides of the spectrum, you can either think that all the other maps are zerg-favored, or simply not zerg-unfavored. In other words, a map is good for zerg as long as it is balanced since no map gives zerg the advantage. I'm not really sure what to think of this, but it is interesting that it isn't very unanimously agreed upon.
So instead of complaing and arguing about why the maps are or aren't imbalanced, hypothetically, if you were going to design the most ridiculously imbalanced zerg map, what would it look like?
Some factors that might come into play:
+ Show Spoiler +Relatively closed off natural Easily accessible third, fourth, (fifth?) base No gold base? Lot of air space behind mineral lines Long rush distance No chokes other than to natural entrance No cliffs Good amount of xel-naga towers Air space in middle of map for overlord placements Multiple attack paths Many flanking routes Wide open spaces Difficult to contain middle of map No islands Lots of bases (4 player map?)
This is a kinda crappy map I made since I am no good with map design. But it's essentially a four player map with a huge open middle. Imagine that the distances were actually long enough to be safe, but the entire middle is completely open like a big blob. Would this kind of design be favorable to zerg?
|
Pretty sure as long as the distances are so far that Zerg can relatively safely drone up and obtain quite a few bases to renew his army instantly - it is a Zerg favoured map.
|
imo shattered temple would be ideal if u would bring back the islands it would be zerg heaven^^
your map looks good for zerg, but make sure u make 2nd ramp big enough so zerg can pressure a fast expansion of protoss or terran :D
|
I think any map with very narrow passages/ramps are going to hurt zerg alot. Also, Zerg needs to be able to defend 3 bases at MINIMUM, for it to be zerg favored. If its impossible to get a third, Zerg will always struggle with it. I also thought that the bigger the map, the more zerg favored it is, but after watching the GSL maps for about 3 weeks I have a hard time believing that is entirely true.
|
I disagree about the closed-off natural. Zerg generally relies less on chokepoints for defence than the other races, and hence open naturals are likely easier to hold for zerg players than for the other races. A more important feature is having the natural close to the main, as it makes defending both bases early on easier, and allows the creep to be linked up much sooner.
I also think these half-sized expansions we've seen in some GSL maps may be beneficial to zerg. As a zerg player will need to build lots of hatcheries regardless, there is less disadvantage in claiming a half-sized expansion that there would be for protoss or terran.
|
Huge map. 4 elevated bases in each corner with a wide ramp, rest of the map is completely flat and open. 6 mineral patches per base, high yield gas at every expansion. 10+ expansions across the edges of the map.
|
Interesting topic, although I along with most other zerg players would argue, that any "zerg favored" map is actually just a non-zerg disfavored map.
The ability to expand freely and the availability of a wide open center is imo, exploitable by all races, not necessarily just zerg. Look at Terminus RE, probably one of the two most macro oriented maps there are, i haven't seen a zerg win a pro game there yet (although the sample size is still quite low).
Most people think that any non-rush map is zerg favored, but 95% of all zergs would most definitely disagree. I think being screwed on spawn locations is something that marks all zerg disfavored maps, so maybe that has something to do with it.
|
I really love Peaks I think thats quite a balanced map for zerg. Yea they are some tight chokes but everything cant be zerg friendly just like how everything isnt terran/protoss friendly.
Its like Pokemon Fire is good against Grass but not Water And water is good against Fire but not grass And grass is good against Water but not Fire. Not meaning the pokemon are the races of starcraft but instead the situations and tactics of the game. like forcefields
|
Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
|
Destination from BW would be pretty good. Medusa would also be a great map to see in the SC2 map pool.
For reference, in case you didn't play BW:
Destination + Show Spoiler +
Neo Medusa + Show Spoiler +
|
Blistering Sands...
any map where they can abuse mobility and put severe pressure on you.
Expansions that are far away for most races to defend but easy for zerg because their units are so mobile. (Blistering sand's third expo for example"
|
On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
Well my main goal is to combat complaining about maps being zerg unfavored by going the complete opposite to find out what zerg actually wants in a map and go from there. In order to make an equally favorable map, you have to know what is favorable for each race, and to be completely honest, even though I play zerg, I'm not entirely sure what is actually "zerg-favored" and not just not unfair for zerg.
Hopefully this can become discussion without arguing about complaints about maps since all we're doing here is looking at what is good about maps.
|
How about one big flat square with bases in every corner and a couple xel naga towers. I don't think zerg could lose on this map. Every thing you add from there is slightly anti-zerg in some way or another.
|
Pretty much metalopolis cross positions is about as good as it gets for us zergies. Watchtowers to see them coming a mile away, wide open third, solid airspace to spot drops, easy to take 5 bases., relatively harassable third base.
|
Your map kinda reminds me of Backwater Gulch in terms of layout, though I guess making it large with long rush distances would be a good step in mapmaking.
On one hand, a lot of Zergs want an easy natural and an easy 3rd base due to the nature of Zerg macro requiring one more base than the opponent. However, for every base that is easy to take for a Zerg, it may be easier to take for a Terran or Protoss. I think that's the reason why the GSL maps haven't been as Zerg favored as expected. Terrans and Protosses were having a very easy time quickly taking the free 3rd expansion, which prompts Zerg to expand to riskier expansions later on.
|
Pretty sure it doesn't exist right now don't see any way to have a map that favors zerg people say blistering but idk how that maps dumb I hated it as zerg I felt like you had to all in roach/ling on that map so hard to keep a third.
|
On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
Easier said then done, particularly as new styles emerge and new units get better utilized. With Hellion play gaining popularity, wide open naturals are harder for Zerg players to take for example.
|
Dreamliner (BW Map)
Only at muta harass stage though. Otherwise, it stunk for mid-late game.
|
On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
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.
|
In my opinion, a combination of the following will favour zerg. - long rush distance - relatively short air distance between first 3(4) bases - relatively open area that you must cross to attack - easily defensible natural and 3rd - 4-6 tiles of space behind mineral lines.
|
|
There is no such ting as map zerg favored map. Wide open area? easier to spread versus infester to catch anything close air but high rush distance? Easier for terran to drop and toss to use pheonix.Easy to secure 3rd? Unless terran and toss don't get those then it is still imba. Long rush distance? Harder to baneling bust or roach rush. Like cerebalz say there can never be a zerg favored map because zerg is just zerg. IF there is a zerg favored map, then toss and terran are playing wrong. I mean comon, Open space allows terran to flank zerg and open area for toss allows toss to draw pictures with ff easier.The only way for zerg to get a favorable map is to give give zerg free gold expo inside his base while other race get a hard to defend open nat. Also there should be free creep all over the map. If toss spawn, they need to have killable rock so they can't rush and no gas in expo so they can do void/colo. If terran spawn, less mineral patches so they can't mule and have make sure they they can't build cannons or turrents near mineral lines.
|
I really liked destination they should bring that one into gsl/ ladder pool
|
Neutral creep over the entire map, including the expansions.
|
Slag Pits, if the map dimensions were twice as large. There are a million good flanking opportunities for Zerg players.
|
There isn't a map that "favors" zerg. The reason people mention the other races have map favoritism is mostly due to things like close positions(obviously) and narrow chokes that lead to zergs main/nat/third or provide an easily securable 3rd for terran/toss such as shakuras' back door.
With the removal of lurkers zerg doesn't really have a way to control certain points of the map or narrow chokes like they did in BW. If the map favors muta harass, zerg are still prone to being killed by the protoss deathball or slow marine/tank/turret(for creep removal) pushing at all times, granted zerg can hold it if they play it perfectly or if the other race pushes on to creep instead of just killing it.
Big wide open maps do allow zergs army to do a lot better vs. the superior army of the other races, but scouting is near impossible until lair tech and getting there can be extremely difficult without knowing exactly what the other races are doing.
So for every map that might "favor" zerg there's actually a downside to the favoritism part. There's nothing wrong with this though, I'd rather all maps just be perfectly balanced for all 3 races instead of getting new maps that favor zerg instead of the other 2.
Overall, zerg like maps that are perfectly balanced for all 3 races, there really isn't a map that "favors" zerg.
|
On March 10 2011 17:02 Klive5ive wrote: Neutral creep over the entire map, including the expansions.
Actually this made me think of an interesting idea though I don't know how well it would be pulled off.
Imagine like a destructible tower that acts as a creep tumor in constantly spreading creep around it. You could place it at expansions so it still blocks the hatchery so that you can't ignore it, you have to destroy it first to make the expo there. Since creep would remain, zerg is able to build right away while the other races have to wait a bit.
It could also be interesting in allowing zerg to hide tech without having to pay for a cancel hatch first to lay down a tech structure that will eventually die to lack of creep. Dunno how that would play out, but it could be useful to catch someone off guard with a hidden fast pool or baneling tech. Even a fast +1 might work out.
|
A map where you actually have good hive units? Bus seriously though...
This, at least out of our current map pool is probably the best for zerg. Notice how everything is wide open in the middle giving ample room to surround, and barring close positions, there is a reasonable rush distance. There isn't really a "free" 3rd for protoss, so this is the best we're going to get, really. One thing that can be said disfavoring ST from zerg is that all the mineral lines but the gold hug the edge of the map, so muta harass isn't particularly strong.
Really, the only thing that makes a map "zerg favored" at this stage of the game imo is a map that isn't horrible for us or superb for another race. Most of the new maps have a lot of close closed in corridors that prevent the zerg army from surrounding/flanking opposing armies, giving the strong splash/siege units of terran and protoss a big edge.
So really, is ST really a "zerg map"? No, not really, but it's about the best we can ask for (beside scrap station, and that map is ridiculously good for zerg and every terran/protoss will instantly thumb it down.)
|
On March 10 2011 17:08 Arisen wrote:A map where you actually have good hive units? Bus seriously though... This, at least out of our current map pool is probably the best for zerg. Notice how everything is wide open in the middle giving ample room to surround, and barring close positions, there is a reasonable rush distance. There isn't really a "free" 3rd for protoss, so this is the best we're going to get, really. One thing that can be said disfavoring ST from zerg is that all the mineral lines but the gold hug the edge of the map, so muta harass isn't particularly strong. Really, the only thing that makes a map "zerg favored" at this stage of the game imo is a map that isn't horrible for us or superb for another race. Most of the new maps have a lot of close closed in corridors that prevent the zerg army from surrounding/flanking opposing armies, giving the strong splash/siege units of terran and protoss a big edge. So really, is ST really a "zerg map"? No, not really, but it's about the best we can ask for (beside scrap station, and that map is ridiculously good for zerg and every terran/protoss will instantly thumb it down.)
WRong open area allows terran to flank zerg. If terran and toss isn't abusing wide open area, they are just bad. Remember there is no such thing as a favorable map.
Scap station is also extremely toss and terran favored. Small choke allows better ff and tanks and short air distance.allows easier drops and pheonix play.
|
like orotoss said, just a plain map. This looks impossible to defend vs mass lings? Also eliminate the surrounding cliffs
|
United States17042 Posts
interesting interesting thread. I'm thinking that a lot of gas would help zerg the most, so maybe 4-6 gas gysers per base, and only 6-8 mineral patches. at 6 mineral patches, close nat, and lots of airspace around the main+nat, the other races would be forced to expand just as much, while needing to defend their base from muta from a majority of angles.
|
The people saying there is no such thing as a zerg favored map are wrong. If a map were, for example, extra large, and had no terrain at all (was a big blank square) with a couple expos, it would obviously be zerg favored, because it would be so hard for terran or toss to defend their expansions.
|
Basically what you need to look at is what can zerg abuse vs other races.
I can tell you some things from Protoss POV:
- open naturals (incidentally ALL maps in current pool have open naturals): because it's harder to defend your expo from lings/roaches from all angles. On your map all I need to worry about is to defend the choke, then start working on my deathball - open everything. Obviously because a) zerg swarms need to form a perfect arc around protoss deathball to dps effectivly and b) prevents sentry abuse. And zergs can't block chokes anyway - multiple attack paths and big distances: because while my deathball moves to your base, your swarm of speedlings will bypass it, eat all my workers and return back to your base in time to defend
Basically Shattered Temple and Scrap Station are great examples of what zerg could wish for in ZvP
|
On March 10 2011 17:12 jazzbassmatt wrote: The people saying there is no such thing as a zerg favored map are wrong. If a map were, for example, extra large, and had no terrain at all (was a big blank square) with a couple expos, it would obviously be zerg favored, because it would be so hard for terran or toss to defend their expansions.
It is also hard to zerg to defend so your point is invalid.
|
On March 10 2011 17:12 skatman1744 wrote:like orotoss said, just a plain map. This looks impossible to defend vs mass lings? Also eliminate the surrounding cliffs
Reminded me of this straight away:
|
|
On March 10 2011 16:42 fickazzz wrote: imo shattered temple would be ideal if u would bring back the islands it would be zerg heaven^^
Voirdray/Colossus gets even more difficult to handle on maps with islands because protoss can expand there very early without being vulnerable
|
On March 10 2011 17:12 skatman1744 wrote: There it is *shakes in horror*
|
Fighting Spirit, Destination both mentioned in this thread already, I believe, would provide some interesting games =]
|
On March 10 2011 17:12 skatman1744 wrote:like orotoss said, just a plain map. This looks impossible to defend vs mass lings? Also eliminate the surrounding cliffs
Yeah, and put some gold expos in. Might as well make it circle shaped.
|
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....
1. Long rush distances. The longer the better. In fact, were we actually going to make the most Zerg-favored map in the universe (which I've considered doing), it should be 256 x 256 and cross-spawns only. And you have to Zig-zag through it.
2. A backdoor natural. It the safest kind of natural there is!
3. Super-safe expansions. Look at Steppes for a second. Imagine if Steppes had a backdoor natural, in addition to the front door natural (which becomes a third), and the really easy third on Steppes was a really easy fourth. And the middle area of Steppes was replaced with Tal'Darim Altar :D
4, Big open spaces to maximize the surface area and flankability.
5. Here's one I'm thinking about that I haven't heard. Ridges. In BW, there were little cliffs for Carriers to dance around, and how good carriers were on a given map (as opposed to Arbiters) tended to depend on those ridges. Brood Lords have a pretty long range. Giving them a ridge to hide behind and keep Marines from attacking them might make them quite a bit better. This is, of course, pure theorycraft. This doesn't contradict open spaces. If a base had a little ridge right behind the mineral line, Brood Lords can abuse that (as can Carriers, but carriers aren't used in ZvP).
On March 10 2011 17:09 xbankx wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 17:08 Arisen wrote:A map where you actually have good hive units? Bus seriously though... This, at least out of our current map pool is probably the best for zerg. Notice how everything is wide open in the middle giving ample room to surround, and barring close positions, there is a reasonable rush distance. There isn't really a "free" 3rd for protoss, so this is the best we're going to get, really. One thing that can be said disfavoring ST from zerg is that all the mineral lines but the gold hug the edge of the map, so muta harass isn't particularly strong. Really, the only thing that makes a map "zerg favored" at this stage of the game imo is a map that isn't horrible for us or superb for another race. Most of the new maps have a lot of close closed in corridors that prevent the zerg army from surrounding/flanking opposing armies, giving the strong splash/siege units of terran and protoss a big edge. So really, is ST really a "zerg map"? No, not really, but it's about the best we can ask for (beside scrap station, and that map is ridiculously good for zerg and every terran/protoss will instantly thumb it down.) WRong open area allows terran to flank zerg. If terran and toss isn't abusing wide open area, they are just bad. Remember there is no such thing as a favorable map.
But Terran and Toss units work best in tight balls....
|
On March 10 2011 17:09 xbankx wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 17:08 Arisen wrote:A map where you actually have good hive units? Bus seriously though... This, at least out of our current map pool is probably the best for zerg. Notice how everything is wide open in the middle giving ample room to surround, and barring close positions, there is a reasonable rush distance. There isn't really a "free" 3rd for protoss, so this is the best we're going to get, really. One thing that can be said disfavoring ST from zerg is that all the mineral lines but the gold hug the edge of the map, so muta harass isn't particularly strong. Really, the only thing that makes a map "zerg favored" at this stage of the game imo is a map that isn't horrible for us or superb for another race. Most of the new maps have a lot of close closed in corridors that prevent the zerg army from surrounding/flanking opposing armies, giving the strong splash/siege units of terran and protoss a big edge. So really, is ST really a "zerg map"? No, not really, but it's about the best we can ask for (beside scrap station, and that map is ridiculously good for zerg and every terran/protoss will instantly thumb it down.) WRong open area allows terran to flank zerg. If terran and toss isn't abusing wide open area, they are just bad. Remember there is no such thing as a favorable map. Scap station is also extremely toss and terran favored. Small choke allows better ff and tanks and short air distance.allows easier drops and pheonix play.
What, in your oppinion is good for zerg, then? Because closed in areas aren't good, and open areas aren't good, so everything is bad for zerg? No, you're being obtuse. Complaints like this are what's wrong with a large portion of the new SC2 crowd. You're not trying to focus on anything positive, you're just saying zerg is weak, and everyone else is overpowered, which isn't constructive at all. So many players aren't willing to work on a matchup they're having problems with and just cry imbalance. There are indeed several problems with zerg, but they aren't anywhere near as severe as you're making them sound.
@ the OP, I implore you to disregard this guy if you're trying to actually understand the dynamics of maps and their effects on the three races. The reason zerg likes wide open areas is because they can surround terran and protoss armies, which are focused around a "ball" dynamic, forming one concentrated group of units that have a lot of synergy together that makes them compound into an exponentially stronger army. They're not going to be splitting it apart because as the ball gets smaller, every unit becomes a little less powerful, though terrans will slow push and use groups of marines to snipe hatches and retreat them back to the main tank ball.
As to the scrap station being terran or toss favored, just about every professional Terran and Protoss thumb down SS at tournaments. IdrA discusses this in a state of the game a few months ago, where GSL wasn't getting the map diversity that they wanted because every zerg was down voting the same maps (steppes/delta) and every terran and protoss were thumbing down Scrap. In a more recent state of the game, iNcontroL, NonY, and PainUser all agree that scrap station is a horrible map.
|
I like the maps being posted here. I like the idea of a map with a very open center with fewer choke points. It would be interesting to see how it panned out with good players duking it out.
|
Here's my idea of a balanced map (that's not unfavorable to zerg):
- No abusable cliffs/terrain as in Lost Temple. This simply streamlines me to force a tactic like Mutas, limiting my options and thus allowing my opponent to be much more efficient in his army comp.
- Relatively close 3rd.
- No extremely close close-positions Slag pits? Notnx.
If the map fails to meet any of these 3 criterias, it's automatically not favorable to zergs.
How a favorable map would look like in my book:
- Long rush distance between bases, allowing zerg to scout a push in time, thus allowing you to drone up excessively. - An easily defendable expo with wide ramps that both reduce the effectiveness of forcefields and make your opponent extra shaky towards the idea of a speedling rush. - Wide open spaces for flanking/runbys.
|
On March 10 2011 17:29 Efemral wrote: I like the maps being posted here. I like the idea of a map with a very open center with fewer choke points. It would be interesting to see how it panned out with good players duking it out.
They have a map like that, it's called shattered temple.
|
Russian Federation483 Posts
|
1. Long rush distances. The longer the better. In fact, were we actually going to make the most Zerg-favored map in the universe (which I've considered doing), it should be 256 x 256 and cross-spawns only. And you have to Zig-zag through it. [/QUOTE]
This is good for zerg in the sense that you have a long time to drone and you will survive many rushes, but in ZvP, the protoss will have easy access to a third and fourth gas and will be able to make a virtually indestructible ball, because protoss is limited more by gas than minerals in the mid/late game. IdrA addresses this with the new GSL maps in the most recent state of the game.
|
Interesting topic for sure. Please organize a poll on this topic soon.
|
when there is creep its zerg favored, even long chokes are a deathtrap for a terran when there is creep on it, unless he can block the front with thors x3. So i think a good balanced map will feel always a little zerg unfavored x3 .
But open naturals are something neat for zerg, no rocks on the 3rd as well, and pathes to run around opponents main armys. Also if pathes the opponent will take are predictable. And the longer the rush distance between the bases the better, since the longer it his the easier it is for the zerg to intercept reinforcements or completly kill off any rush completly. (wish terran or toss could do that too ;( )
|
A zerg favoured map would have no ramp that you could do speedling all ins and roach all ins and it would be undefeatable ^^
|
On March 10 2011 16:46 Jumbled wrote: I disagree about the closed-off natural. Zerg generally relies less on chokepoints for defence than the other races, and hence open naturals are likely easier to hold for zerg players than for the other races. A more important feature is having the natural close to the main, as it makes defending both bases early on easier, and allows the creep to be linked up much sooner.
I also think these half-sized expansions we've seen in some GSL maps may be beneficial to zerg. As a zerg player will need to build lots of hatcheries regardless, there is less disadvantage in claiming a half-sized expansion that there would be for protoss or terran. This
I never really thought about this until I read a post by MorroW a while ago along these lines.
On consideration, open expansions are better for zerg because: - they are slightly more difficult for zerg to hold early-game, but much easier to hold late-game (eg defending a tank push) - they don't allow terran or protoss to super-fast expand
|
A cool map for sure. I'm not sure the size of this map, but if it's a medium sized map, that is to say close positions aren't a stones throw from each other, this would be decent for zerg. I don't see any obviously pro zerg features, as there are some allys created in the center, but it's wide enough open to get a good flank. I think this is a pretty neutral map, but I'd like to see some games on it. It's got nice symmetry with the natural being strong for muta harass (open area behind), but not the main.
One map I PRAY we see in SC2 that I think will also create some good games... + Show Spoiler +
|
As cerebalz said, terran and toss isn't abusing open area when they do and they will. They will win.
Look, every game I lose I played better than my opponent. Every game I win, my opponent is either terrible and played bad or Im just lucky. My opponents are usually just terrible and you know how it feels like going into every game thinking there is no way to win no matter what you do? Maps isnt going to change anything. GSL is proof. Look bigger maps with open center and toss got stronger. Terran got weaker. Zerg is still the same. There is no winning with zerg. You can't win early game cause they can wall and ff, you can't win mid game cause they can timing pushes. You can't win late game. Zerg is fundamentally broken. Listen to the man idra. No map can change that
|
Russian Federation483 Posts
On March 10 2011 17:48 Arisen wrote:One map I PRAY we see in SC2 that I think will also create some good games... iCCup Python 2 by neobowman
|
On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
in my opinion, I don't think we'll ever see a map that is favorable to all of the races because at some point a map may be zerg favored but ends up becoming toss/terran favored later on. For example, Jungle Basin and Scrap station are zerg favored early on due to easy expansions but become terran/toss favored once you need to secure a 3rd.
I also don't think we'll see balanced maps because blizzard balanced this game on small maps like steppes of war, blistering sands and even close position LT/Meta. Also, look at a map like Terminus RE, it offers 3 pretty safe expansions, this works for and against the zerg because Toss and Terran also get 3 safe expansions AND can wall off and once Toss/terran get more than 2 bases it becomes very hard for zerg to compete. So most likely we'll have maps that favor/unfavor zerg early game and later unfavor/favor zerg late game, I think that's just how blizzard designed this game.
|
|
On March 10 2011 17:54 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable? in my opinion, I don't think we'll ever see a map that is favorable to all of the races because at some point a map may be zerg favored but ends up becoming toss/terran favored later on. For example, Jungle Basin and Scrap station are zerg favored early on due to easy expansions but become terran/toss favored once you need to secure a 3rd. I also don't think we'll see balanced maps because blizzard balanced this game on small maps like steppes of war, blistering sands and even close position LT/Meta. Also, look at a map like Terminus RE, it offers 3 pretty safe expansions, this works for and against the zerg because Toss and Terran also get 3 safe expansions AND can wall off and once Toss/terran get more than 2 bases it becomes very hard for zerg to compete. So most likely we'll have maps that favor/unfavor zerg early game and later unfavor/favor zerg late game, I think that's just how blizzard designed this game.
Yes this is the point. Maps don't affect anything Zerg is just bad no matter on whatever maps.
I think an easy fix is to nerf(double their supply count and make them cost more) tanks, colossus and void ray and marines. Put roach back to 1 supply and make hydras cost less and have more hp and faster off creep. Otherwise, zerg will always lose on whatever map whenever.
|
On March 10 2011 17:48 xbankx wrote: As cerebalz said, terran and toss isn't abusing open area when they do and they will. They will win.
Look, every game I lose I played better than my opponent. Every game I win, my opponent is either terrible and played bad or Im just lucky. My opponents are usually just terrible and you know how it feels like going into every game thinking there is no way to win no matter what you do? Maps isnt going to change anything. GSL is proof. Look bigger maps with open center and toss got stronger. Terran got weaker. Zerg is still the same. There is no winning with zerg. You can't win early game cause they can wall and ff, you can't win mid game cause they can timing pushes. You can't win late game. Zerg is fundamentally broken. Listen to the man idra. No map can change that
IdrA only has 2 real beefs with zerg that probably need to be adressed...
1) Poor hive tech 2) Lack of scouting early game to pin an opponent on a build.
Your view of zerg is just poor. Yes, they're very difficult, and I play zerg and I know how you feel, but saying that they're fundamentally broken is just wrong, and leads to more balance discussion and complaining which leads to a degradation of thread quality, which leads to a weaker community. Look, zergs are still doing well in a lot of tournaments, which wouldn't happen if they're fundamentally broken. It's OK to say you're frustrated and feel lost, and most zergs would agree with you, but just saying the game is broken is a poor view.
To address Protoss being better on the new maps, this has more to do with the easily accessible third/fourth gas which allow protoss's great T3 units to kick in en masse and create a very strong ball which is very hard to break. In terms of map architecture, though, wide open areas are less ideal for protoss. That isn't to say that it's bad for them, either, though. Closed spaces make it easy to dissect armies with forcefields and improves unit efficiency. The reason you want a wide open space for zerg is the largely melee/short range focused army of zerg is hindered when you can't surround an army because either your lings are only hitting a very small surface area, or all your roaches are not hitting the enemy at the same time where all the protoss/terran units can hit the zerg.
|
You know Kulas? take that, but remove every cliff.
Basically a map with no ramps, and no chokes, and a decent rush distance.
Narrow ramps are the bane of all zerg units.
|
On March 10 2011 17:51 chuDr3t4 wrote:iCCup Python 2 by neobowman
Sweet ^^ Now only if we could play these on the ladder >< The only issue I have with this neopython is that zergs seem way strong here as every mineral line is great for muta harass.
|
I actually think if maps get too big they become harder for the zerg. When you end up in a huge macro game terran and protoss can use the huge maps to keep you away from them and use their super powerful pinpoint harass to smash your outying bases while you cant touch theirs because they have 10 photon cannons or a planetary fortress at each expansion (and once your at 200/200 with 3 or more mining bases there's no reason to hold back on the cannons and PF's).
Everyone thinks that a giant map is better for zerg, but thats only because of all the daimond newbies farming wins with 1 trick hyper-agressive play. A good long game terran/ protoss player can actually use the distance against you because it will be they who just keep expanding and building 10 cannons at every base once they are maxed.
On a small map zerg can control the terran and protoss enough to keep them bite size. On a large map the zerg getings into a situation where they have to make too many decisions and strategical moves compared to a terran or protoss, simply because their outlying expansions are far more squishy.
It's almost like you need to build 5 spine crawlers and 3 spore cralers at each expansion just so that you can focus your attention on beating the terran ball.
Otherwise you see what happened to ret and haypro in code A. They played well, but noone can play well enough to defend 3 expansions simultaneously at different points on the map from dropships while holding back a death push through the middle.
Meanwhile the terrran can sit back and laugh because the only way a zerg can snipe a terran expansion is by using your entire force or suiciding 30 banelings into the planetary which leaves you vulnerable while you replenish.
On top of that, on a huge map its 10 times harder to spread your creep far enough to allow some quick offsive movements and its about 10x more of a pain in the ass when they kill all your tumors and you have to respread your creep.
I think that choke points are what makes or breaks a zerg map, because zerg need to be in your face to actually kill anything. If it's too hard to get into a good position to fight that deathball because of ledges and forcefeilds in corridoors, then the map is gonna be hard. Open spaces past the natural which you can keep your force mobile with minimal choke points is ideal.
I would give a zerg favored map the follwing criteria.
1. Not to small 2. Not too big 3. Not too many chokepoints
|
I would say the two new maps added recently (Slug Pits and Typhoon Peaks) are ideal for zerg, with the exception of Slug Pits close spawns. Also the redesign of the new Lost Temple is somewhat favouring zerg. Here are the factors that matter for me (I am protoss and these are in fact the factors making me uncomfortable against zerg): - wide and open areas (Slug Pits & Shattered Temple) - No expansions in the centre to control with planetary/cannons+death ball (Shattered, slag pits, typhoon peaks) - Multiple attack paths (typhoon peaks and somewhat slug pits) - close natural easily connectable with 1-2 creep tumors with the main (shattered, typhoon peaks)
|
On March 10 2011 20:08 Sir_J wrote: I would say the two new maps added recently (Slug Pits and Typhoon Peaks) are ideal for zerg, with the exception of Slug Pits close spawns. Also the redesign of the new Lost Temple is somewhat favouring zerg. Here are the factors that matter for me (I am protoss and these are in fact the factors making me uncomfortable against zerg): - wide and open areas (Slug Pits & Shattered Temple) - No expansions in the centre to control with planetary/cannons+death ball (Shattered, slag pits, typhoon peaks) - Multiple attack paths (typhoon peaks and somewhat slug pits) - close natural easily connectable with 1-2 creep tumors with the main (shattered, typhoon peaks)
I feel like once you get out to the middle of typhon with some colossus protoss is really strong there because of the narrow corridors. I think zerg is ok on typhon, but will run into problems vs colossus based protoss and seige tank focused terrans.
|
Lot of air space behind mineral lines
Is that to get killed easier by banshees/void rays ?
|
In order of importance:
Long rush distances. Expansions in the edges of the map rather than between the players. No "free" third expansion. Easy to hold natural, (but not wallable with gateway-forge-cyber core) Open and with alternative routes between each others bases. No island expansions. Good spots for OLs.
The best z map in the map pool is cross position metalopolis, by far.
|
Wouldn't completely open mains make ZvP really hard for P in the early game? The zerg could attack with a bunch of lings and the initial zealot obviously can't cover ... well, anything really.
I mean, pretty much every P/TvZ, the P/T walls off. So removing the ability to wall off would make it Z favoured IMO.
|
natural expo in front of main ramp third base right beside natural 1 hour walking distance between bases no cliffs doodads walls rocks or any type of arcitecture on the map completely flat ground middle with no chokes anywhere gold 4th base right beside 3rd 4 player map
|
I think you guys are all overthinking this. IMO a completely open map without any choke points or terrain would be godlike for Zerg. If Terran/Protoss can't wall in it takes away so many options, not to mention how good lings and roaches are on open terrain, and then there's the fact that you can constantly run lings in and scout then you can know exactly when it's safe to power drones and when you have to make units, Zerg benefits far more from omniscience than other races due to how their economy works.
|
a lot of people seem to confuse "balanced" with "zerg favored" itt
for example: a lot of narrow places and chokes and short distances make it pretty much impossible for Z to win a straight up game unless the Z player is really better or executes an all-in perfectly. if the distance is longer or there is open space, it suddenly seems like it's an omg amazing Z map! but in fact it's not really Z FAVORED, it just makes it possible to deal with very cool stuff like colballs or huge tank lines, but certainly not easy.
the few things that would really favor Z are ridiculous anyway, like removing the ability to wall off, yeah sure that'd be nice for Z, but stupid
|
This does not look that good at all :O.
|
killing fields (from broodwar) was the zerg style map. no chokes or ramps, and tons of open space.
|
I don't really find the maps bother me so much once I know them... I have specific places on each map I like to catch big ball armies if I am on D that they pretty much need to cross in order to get to my base.
I like to try and come at them from at least 2 directions on any map.
|
I guess it's kinda important that it is a 4-player-Map, because:
- Makes early scouting harder, which means that the opponent can less likely pull off some cheese, block your Expansion and other stuff like that. - Also, against Mech/Deathball, it's important that you can expand far away from your Main, but also far away from the opponent, so the slower moving Army of the opponent can't kill all your bases without having to travel too far and fear a counterattack etc.
Also, because Zerg has a quite hard time destroying destructible Rocks, the less rocks the better for the Zerg I guess.
Wide open spaces with different pathways are also quite important, at least in the middle-area of the Map.
A rather narrow entrance to the nat without much space behind the Minerals is also quite important for defending against Hellions.
Another thing is of course nice places around the Map for the Overlords to hide (without Xel-Naga Towers near them so they can be sniped too easily).
No Single-Gas-Expansions, those aren't that useful for Zerg tbh.
|
On March 10 2011 20:50 Falcon_NL wrote:This does not look that good at all :O.
you cant build there..
|
On March 10 2011 16:59 xbankx wrote: I mean comon, Open space allows terran to flank zerg and open area for toss allows toss to draw pictures with ff easier.
Zerg tends to be more difficult to play than other races, but all balance discussion aside, if Terran is flanking Zerg then Zerg is doing something wrong.
|
I'd like to throw in the notion of little cliff-mound things. Essentially some raised bit of terrain, really small but where you can stick a floating overlord to safely keep watch without being spotted by passing units below the raised ground. I like it when my spotter ovies are safe
|
I'd have to say Desert Oasis is what a zerg favored map looks like. Or at least it did before the phoenix was introduced. Mutalisks on that map were pretty incredible.
|
|
those look like gigantic testicals
User was temp banned for this post.
|
I feel like one helpful thing for zerg is a medium sized map where there are multiple attack paths but they can be easily covered in creep. For example on metalopolis cross-position its really easy to build 2 creep highways along the map, giving you nearly perfect vision of the map and the ability to move extremely quickly.
On bigger maps its obviously much harder to get such information so easily. People sometimes underestimate what good creep spread can mean for a zerg.
|
On March 10 2011 18:07 Hectic wrote: Everyone thinks that a giant map is better for zerg, but thats only because of all the daimond newbies farming wins with 1 trick hyper-agressive play. A good long game terran/ protoss player can actually use the distance against you because it will be they who just keep expanding and building 10 cannons at every base once they are maxed.
On a small map zerg can control the terran and protoss enough to keep them bite size. On a large map the zerg getings into a situation where they have to make too many decisions and strategical moves compared to a terran or protoss, simply because their outlying expansions are far more squishy.
It's almost like you need to build 5 spine crawlers and 3 spore cralers at each expansion just so that you can focus your attention on beating the terran ball.
So you start off by saying that large maps are bad for zerg because protoss can just build 10 cannons at every expansion when maxed, and it will be impossible to break.
And then you seemingly forget what you just wrote, and say that "it's almost like" zerg has to build 5 spine crawlers and 3 spore crawlers at every expansion to be able to defend them.
Am I missing some crucial point here?
It's easier for A to do X than it is for B to do X, because while A only has to do Y to be able to do X, it's almost like B has to do Y to be able to do X. Which is a lot harder, obviously.
|
On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable?
Why create imbalance? Why not create balance?
Because it's not always on purpose.
|
Just make a giant wide-open map that is covered in creep that can't be removed.
|
Zerg Favored Map - Ling/Bling/Ultras have good open areas to fight.
Terran Favored Map - Tank+Viking would reign supreme.
EDIT: Images loading... ...is imgur broken?
Anyway, the maps are identical in bases, 8 bases on the entire thing, one in each corner and one on each side, except: Zerg favored has each main base with 2 ramps each and everything else flat. Terran favored has tons of cliffs and ramps for tank placement.
|
No ramps. giant map. no chokes. no doodads. no elevation.
=)
|
On March 11 2011 02:26 1Eris1 wrote: No ramps. giant map. no chokes. no doodads. no elevation.
=) covered in creep
|
Zergs have an absurd and disproportionate win-rate on scrap station. I would say that qualifies it as a zerg map.
|
I'm not sure giant maps favor zerg. If they don't have complete vision of drops/banshees/voids coming it can be actually quite bad for zerg. If the amount of overlords we have don't suffice in terms of map vision it's no good.
|
Something I haven't seen mentioned yet is that zerg does not have to contend with runbys, so naturally, anything which makes it difficult to wall (like Slag Pits) to defend the nat and the main at the same time is favorable to zerg (provided the rush distances are long enough to make one-base play inefficient). For instance, a map with a single attack path to both the nat and main with a large distance between the ramp and the nat would be hell to wall.
|
On March 11 2011 02:18 Sajuuk7 wrote:Zerg Favored Map - Ling/Bling/Ultras have good open areas to fight. Terran Favored Map - Tank+Viking would reign supreme. EDIT: Images loading... ...is imgur broken? Anyway, the maps are identical in bases, 8 bases on the entire thing, one in each corner and one on each side, except: Zerg favored has each main base with 2 ramps each and everything else flat. Terran favored has tons of cliffs and ramps for tank placement. This is a good comparison of what is ideal for T and Z. The only thing I would change for the ideal T map is one ramp at the gold instead of 2 but thats just me nit-picking the crap out of it n_n
On March 10 2011 17:09 xbankx wrote: WRong open area allows terran to flank zerg. If terran and toss isn't abusing wide open area, they are just bad. Remember there is no such thing as a favorable map.
Scap station is also extremely toss and terran favored. Small choke allows better ff and tanks and short air distance.allows easier drops and pheonix play. You contradicted yourself... How is there no such thing as a favorable map? You even gave an example of a favorable map the next sentence.. Not to mention most everything you said is hogwash.
|
If I was to make a map to ridiculously favor zerg (without being unplayable by other races) it would be this:
- Very long ground distance - no gold bases - LoS blockers all through the middle - No pathable cliffs (colossus/reaper cliffwalk doesn't do anything) - XN towers that can see most of the enemies main/nat from outside - unpathable cliffs near/in the enemies base to park overlords on for scouting - no room behind mineral lines at all, instead an unpathable cliff providing a good place to retreat mutas over. this forces any cannons/turrets to be in the mineral line itself to offer any protection. - very wide open middle of the map
Other ideas that would make the map favor zerg in funny/possibly very imba ways: - Short air distance, blocked by a thick wall of invulnerable eggs, meaning zerg can burrow-move under them, as well as spread creep into the enemies base - Neutral creep tumors all over the middle of the map. - neutral creep at natural expansion, requiring P/T to get detection to kill tumor before expanding - neutral creep covering the choke point to your base, preventing wall-off for anybody but zerg, and actually allowing zerg to wall-off. - Pack of neutral motherships/colossus/tanks to be Neural parasited - unpathable to expansions, even by air, but enough vision for a nydus worm is possible from a XN tower
|
A battle royal remake from BW, that disastrous proleague map would be the absolute zerg favoured map.
|
every choke, high ground, cliff and the like make a map less zerg favored. the more wide open the better.
the only thing that zerg can sometimes benefit from is places without any land that they can hide overlords in to see incoming drops/bansees.
|
On March 11 2011 02:18 Sajuuk7 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Zerg Favored Map - Ling/Bling/Ultras have good open areas to fight. Terran Favored Map - Tank+Viking would reign supreme. EDIT: Images loading... ...is imgur broken? Anyway, the maps are identical in bases, 8 bases on the entire thing, one in each corner and one on each side, except: Zerg favored has each main base with 2 ramps each and everything else flat. Terran favored has tons of cliffs and ramps for tank placement. You didn't add the Protoss favored map, so I'll do it for you.
If you want to play the alpha version of the map, with too wide a choke and too many player spawning locations, it's called Fastest Possible Map.
|
A ridiculously favored zerg map ?
Maximum distance map. No ramps. No cliffs.No xel naga towers. No cliffs. Nothing. Just bases. No gold bases.Expansions quite a bit away from each other. 2 bases to expand to close to starting location (to stop pylon blocks, etc).
What would this accomplish? Make cliff abuse / forcefields useless. Make zerglings insanely useful scouts. Make flanking dead easy. etc. Zerg should win 100% of the games at such a map.
|
On March 11 2011 03:53 aebriol wrote: A ridiculously favored zerg map ?
Maximum distance map. No ramps. No cliffs.No xel naga towers. No cliffs. Nothing. Just bases. No gold bases.Expansions quite a bit away from each other. 2 bases to expand to close to starting location (to stop pylon blocks, etc).
What would this accomplish? Make cliff abuse / forcefields useless. Make zerglings insanely useful scouts. Make flanking dead easy. etc. Zerg should win 100% of the games at such a map.
you'd want XN towers as zerg to provide you easy vision without risking more then a few lings.
|
On March 11 2011 03:54 Shiladie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2011 03:53 aebriol wrote: A ridiculously favored zerg map ?
Maximum distance map. No ramps. No cliffs.No xel naga towers. No cliffs. Nothing. Just bases. No gold bases.Expansions quite a bit away from each other. 2 bases to expand to close to starting location (to stop pylon blocks, etc).
What would this accomplish? Make cliff abuse / forcefields useless. Make zerglings insanely useful scouts. Make flanking dead easy. etc. Zerg should win 100% of the games at such a map. you'd want XN towers as zerg to provide you easy vision without risking more then a few lings. Nah actually, I'd rather be completely free to flank without warning whenever opponent moves out. Keep their base surrounded by lings to spot things moving out early game, later game keep creep everywhere.
Anyway, it would be in my interest to keep opponent from taking their third, and it would be so easy on such a map. Could even deny their second for a long time.
That map needs to be on the ladder ... just that and steppes of war, a nice combination for everyone to play on
|
you forgot the rich 4 geyser only expansions
|
long rush distances
moderately open naturals. I say this because zerg, thanks to speedlings and creep, is the most capable of defending early expands. they can hold a relatively open natural like that of metal very early, while a protoss generally couldn't. obviously it can't be too out there in the open, but think along the lines of xelnaga or metalopolis naturals.
wide spaces for surrounds
good overlord chill spots
no close (or negligible) close positions
wide ramps
a layout that allows you to expand away from your opponent. you can't really aggressively expand as zerg. if a hatchery is under attack from a siege line or colossus or something, there's absolutely nothing you can do to save it. for example, taking the gold on xelnaga is hell since you're expanding toward your opponent.
more than 8 expansions (not including main bases), since if a protoss or terran splits the map and turtles on 4 bases, zerg can't get enough resources to break it.
all of those are small aspects of "zerg favored maps." yet by zerg favored, i generally mean "not terran or protoss favored"
|
|
I think larger maps could deal with distances being "too far" for zerg to cover with creep by adding neutral creep tumors on the map much like some BW maps had neutral creep colonies.
|
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.
|
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".
|
i think maps which offer large space around bases but grant small room for the actual base are pretty good because scouting and therefore overlord placement is so essential for zerg. 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.
|
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.
|
Just my opinion -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
|
Don't forget, a wide expansion can also be zerg-favored (depends on size versus chokes)
|
Cover the entire map with creep
|
On March 10 2011 16:55 stupidhydro wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 16:48 Axeinst wrote: Why there should be map that is favorable for some race? why not make map that is equally favorable? 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
|
Very small main base.
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.
|
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.
|
In my opinion zerg favors maps that have long distance (aside from the natural), easy to access, hard to hold expansions.
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).
|
Bases with chokes without ramps will be good for zerg. Ramps in general are bad for zerg, partly cuz creep spread is harder with ramps - i.e. Crossfire and Terminus.
|
The entire map is covered in neutral creep except for the area surrounding the nexus/command centers.
|
On March 11 2011 20:54 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +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). 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.
|
the biggest map possible entirely flat with two spawns diagonally seperated, not sure how the minerals would be, or really any map that makes walling off REALLY hard
|
One where you spawn as Terran.
|
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.
|
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
|
Here is my take on the "Zerg attributes" for a map:
- Main base creep should be close enough to the main ramp to plant several Spine Crawlers in reach of it without requiring a Creep Tumor.
- Main base entrance should have only a limited area which can be shelled by artillery from the outside and a short distance of cliff to jump / blink up (kinda like Steppes of War had).
- Natural base should be behind the main base and relatively FAR AWAY from it. The reason for the increased distance is not for the Zergs own defensive benefit but rather for their offensive benefit. Close bases mean that only a few turrets can cover a large area against Muta harrass and only a few Pylons / Supply Depots need to be placed around the bases to spot for drops and Nyduses.
- Ground rush distance should be pretty large.
- Middle area should have relatively open spaces or several separated routes from A to B.
- Cliffs should be minimal but line-of-sight blocking grass is good.
|
On March 10 2011 17:13 xbankx wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 17:12 jazzbassmatt wrote: The people saying there is no such thing as a zerg favored map are wrong. If a map were, for example, extra large, and had no terrain at all (was a big blank square) with a couple expos, it would obviously be zerg favored, because it would be so hard for terran or toss to defend their expansions. It is also hard to zerg to defend so your point is invalid.
No. Zerg's don't really benefit much from having a "choke" at their natural or main, at least when compared to other races.
|
Close air distances, extremely far rush distances. Extremely open areas, almost no cliffs, very plain open field. Large overall map. Lots of expansions with only around 4-5 mineral patches per expansion. Main and natural might also have less overall mineral patches. Main also relatively small. Generally 4 player maps instead of 2 or 3. Ability to expand away from the enemy instead of towards.
On March 12 2011 07:19 jazzbassmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 17:13 xbankx wrote:On March 10 2011 17:12 jazzbassmatt wrote: The people saying there is no such thing as a zerg favored map are wrong. If a map were, for example, extra large, and had no terrain at all (was a big blank square) with a couple expos, it would obviously be zerg favored, because it would be so hard for terran or toss to defend their expansions. It is also hard to zerg to defend so your point is invalid. No. Zerg's don't really benefit much from having a "choke" at their natural or main, at least when compared to other races.
They benefit quite a bit vs 2rax and 4gate, so I'm not sure why you're saying that.
|
Zerg favored maps wont ever exist. The maps would be extremely plain for the most part.
|
It really depends on the zerg player in my opinion, I know a lot of zergs hate 2 player maps like xel'naga just because it limits your options opening wise, but I like the high aggression early game. Inversely, I think it's boring to play on GSL's Tal'Darim because of the size and complete lack of aggression early game. Metalopolis is an ideal map in my opinion, even on close positions. The relative lack of cliffs and pathing obstructions makes it really fun to play, and comfortable to deal with. Steppes would also be a zerg map if the ramps were wider across the board, as well as making the rush distance a little bit bigger (increasing the middle plateau by 50% would make it better I think).
One thing that can completely make playing on a map super annoying are cliffs, I'm talking to you lost temple. Having to go out of your way to defend a drop that may come because it is so powerful when the T is just massing marines and planning on allining is frustrating. Not quite as annoying as the cliffs on temple are the backdoors on shakuras plateau, it was super difficult to engage a T or P army entrenched in the backdoor moving slowly forward.
|
Any map that's just a big, flat circle is zerg favored. No ramps, cliffs, doodads. All the space in the world to surround with zerglings.
|
What about a large map with no chokes or cliffs, and with air space around the main base for mutalisks to camp. I think this will make it easy to surround and colossi and tanks will not be as effective.
Only problem would be hellions, so maybe two chokes, one for main and one for natural, but with destructible rocks, which you can later destroy and remove the choke. Not to mention add an extra vespene gas at the main.
|
There are maps that are really strong for certain types of zerg plays. Like with typhon's wide open natural, a roach ling all in after a fast expo is almost free win vs sentry expand protoss. But once you get later in the game it evens out since bases are easy to take for both races. Narrow chokes make colossus strong but also make colossus hard to defend some corrupters coming in from the side.
|
Many bases, very open middle, and the bases are fairly spread out. This way losing 1-2 expansions doesn't really much, but the strength of Zerg Mobility is greatly increased, especially with Nydus play allowing them to move entire armies across the map, as well as Mutalisk Harass being ridiculously strong in ZvT because Thors won't be mobile enough to defend against it, and the T would have to put up a dozen turrets per base. If you want something ridiculously Zerg-favored, you can have neutral Creep Tumors around the map and a super wide ramp, or no ramp at all.
|
The ultimate Z favored map would be a giant flat ground with no chokes and or ramps. That would make Zerg practically unstoppable, To get a balanced map or a map that does not let T or P take advantage of Z (and each other) you have to start w/ an open map and close it off bit by bit til you get something to work with.
I drew this up pretty quick, I imagine it being approximately the size of crevasse but that would be subject to change.
EDIT: I only made 1/4 bases but the still. Also the center gold expo is lowered with the middle ring being up higher, all of the red area is a ramp. their are 2 big wide ramp on each side of the center. the bases go down to the third, the second is same lvl as main circle and main is 1 lvl higher than center area. the extra ramps to the center area are supposed to be pretty small, like 4 hex's.
|
|
Completely open map, expansions everywhere, no high-ground, ramps, or chokes, tons of open air around bases for mutas/overlord placement. Zerg would win every time.
|
On March 10 2011 18:03 Arisen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2011 17:48 xbankx wrote: As cerebalz said, terran and toss isn't abusing open area when they do and they will. They will win.
Look, every game I lose I played better than my opponent. Every game I win, my opponent is either terrible and played bad or Im just lucky. My opponents are usually just terrible and you know how it feels like going into every game thinking there is no way to win no matter what you do? Maps isnt going to change anything. GSL is proof. Look bigger maps with open center and toss got stronger. Terran got weaker. Zerg is still the same. There is no winning with zerg. You can't win early game cause they can wall and ff, you can't win mid game cause they can timing pushes. You can't win late game. Zerg is fundamentally broken. Listen to the man idra. No map can change that IdrA only has 2 real beefs with zerg that probably need to be adressed... 1) Poor hive tech 2) Lack of scouting early game to pin an opponent on a build. Your view of zerg is just poor. Yes, they're very difficult, and I play zerg and I know how you feel, but saying that they're fundamentally broken is just wrong, and leads to more balance discussion and complaining which leads to a degradation of thread quality, which leads to a weaker community. Look, zergs are still doing well in a lot of tournaments, which wouldn't happen if they're fundamentally broken. It's OK to say you're frustrated and feel lost, and most zergs would agree with you, but just saying the game is broken is a poor view. To address Protoss being better on the new maps, this has more to do with the easily accessible third/fourth gas which allow protoss's great T3 units to kick in en masse and create a very strong ball which is very hard to break. In terms of map architecture, though, wide open areas are less ideal for protoss. That isn't to say that it's bad for them, either, though. Closed spaces make it easy to dissect armies with forcefields and improves unit efficiency. The reason you want a wide open space for zerg is the largely melee/short range focused army of zerg is hindered when you can't surround an army because either your lings are only hitting a very small surface area, or all your roaches are not hitting the enemy at the same time where all the protoss/terran units can hit the zerg. I love how xbankx is trolling you in a ridiculously obvious fashion and still there are Zergies that take him serious. For a Zerg favored map, take Shattered temple, remove the rocks blocking the entrance to the corner expos, widen the ramp between natural and main abit and give extra space behind the main and natural minerals.
|
I like the idea of reducing minerals per base (6 patches), and only having 1 gas per base, but lots of expansions.
Once zerg captures map control, the turtles would be stuck on 1 or 2 base, while zerg takes 5 base and runs on 5+ gas vs 2 gas.
Also the 2 base turtle would only have 12 mineral patches mining effectively while zerg would have 30 patches.
Under these conditions you could let them choke up their ramps all day, there's no way they're coming out of it with a crap load of thor, banchee or collossus and the dreaded 3 base protoss would be no worries either.
Everyone would be forced to come out into the open or starve
|
I think it is important to note that Backwater Gulch is what people are describing as a Zerg favored map. Especially against Protoss. The distance between the natural and mian is incredible due to the ledge and ramp placement, and the wide bottom ramp maes it bad for Protoss to fast expand as lings get by very easliy. Needless to say I have down-voted it.
|
the GSL maps are pretty awesome
|
I see Shattered Temple as a Zerg favored map. The middle is HUGE and definitely favors Zerg as far as large engagements go. Back door rocks are helpful for 3rd bases in anything other that close positions. Bigger choke point helps out, along with no cliff. Close air is good for mutas. I have a tough time beating Z there, but that might just be me.
|
The number one most zerg favored map in all of history is God's Garden:
+ Show Spoiler [God's Garden] +
It's a close cousin to Fighting Spirit.
- Easy to defend natural - Backdoor third - If you can expand to another natural and defend it, you get an additional two bases. Much easier for Zerg to split the map up. - Doom drops on another player's third is powerful and easy to do. Zerg can fly back with nydus.
|
here is the deal, you want a balanced map, but to do that there is beyond a few considerations you have to take into account.
For Zerg
-No Rush distance Can Take an enemy opponent less then 55 seconds to transverse to your natural...but no more either. (enough time to build a couple spines only, but not so big you can't spread creep across the map).
-The center needs to be open enough for surrounds, but not be able to be easily cut in half by tank lines. I suspect this is what makes slag pits cross spots work somewhat well, the middle is depressed with raised area around it.
-Must be plenty of places to expand to IE: at least, 12 bases on the map. This is why shak cross and metal cross have provided some of the best games zerg have been in.
For Protoss
-Absolutely must be chokes where FF, Psi Storm, And colossus can do damage.
-Must be just enough distance they have time to get their initial gateway up and cybercore without getting bum rushed...but not more distance or the immobile nature of their army makes leaving home base more difficult.
-Need enough take able bases to get to 3 bases in order to make an effective death ball and not be out of resources after they engage with it.
For Terran
- Need cliffs where siege tanks can be more effective.
- Need as little distance to their opponent as possible.
-Need areas not transversable by ground for their air units and drops.
These are over generalizations, but to balance what the races need is beyond difficult. All 3 need things the others don't want on the large part. Making a map that has all things good for the races would be difficult.
|
Im looking at the drawn map of yours and all i saw was that if it was TvZ T would love this with taking a forward third and seigeing you nat at the same time. xD seems like more pain than pleasure for a Z if you ask me.
|
Map looks horrible for zergs, the positions even cross map the ramps are almost touching one another. Close positions would be a train wreck
|
|
|
|