|
2v2s are beginning to be added to many team leagues, most notably the Collegiate StarLeague, however they are still dealing with an extremely bad map pool. Because of the map pool, we have an extremely all-in based match up. As many of you will remember, the 1v1 ladder maps at release where quite terrible, many of which encouraged 1 or 2 base all ins. Can you imagine if we still had to play on Steppes of War? Well if your a 2v2 player, you don't have to.
+ Show Spoiler +
Remember me?
Without an extremely active 2v2 community maps like these have remained in the ladder. In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find any macro maps on the 2v2 ladder, most of them resemble Steppes of War more than they do Tal'Darim. The reason Steppes of War was so terrible, was that it had extremely close rush distances and very wide naturals. Most 2v2 maps have these features, or they have thirds which are located equidistance from both players bases.
If we look at maps like Tal'darim Altar LE, which appears to be balanced for every matchup, and what can you see?
+ Show Spoiler +
You have an easily securable natural, and an obvious third to take without having to have complete map control.
Now take a look at Lunar Colony V, and tell me where my teammate and I are going to find thirds that are obtainable without complete map control?
+ Show Spoiler +
Notice how both naturals have high ground within siege distance of them. I count five lanes of attack that you have to cover just to take your natural
Now, you can take a look at the rest of the 2v2 map pool and see that there are some bases with easy to take naturals, but almost none that offer 3rds that do not require map control. Look back at Tal'darim Altar, you can take a third without being able to control the Xel'Naga Towers.
I think it helps to take a more indepth look into each of these maps to better understand. So we must use our great powers of Microsoft paint. Let's start with wonderful Tal'Darim first:
+ Show Spoiler +
Notice how you can easily take the bases 1,2, and 3 with only having yourself open to 2 ramps of attack. The third and forth bases both add one additional avenue of attack to exploit. The expansions flow together and there is an obvious base progression. I can take four bases even if I don't have complete map control, or even any control of the center. As long as I control the highground
Now let's look back at Lunar Colony. For a zerg teammate to be able to take a natural, even if his protoss or zerg team mate can't, you have to open up 2 lanes of attack(or 3 depending on how you split it), one of which is a highground.
+ Show Spoiler +
Look at how wide that zerg natural is. Can you imagine if this map was split in half and called a 1v1 map on the ladder? It even gets worse when you try to take a second or a third.....
+ Show Spoiler +
You basically have to control half the map to take your naturals.
+ Show Spoiler +
And you definately have to control all of the map to take these.
I've neglected the golds, because whoever controls their thirds is going to be able to easily deny the golds. They're potential 4ths I suppose, but at that point you've already won the game. Which highlights the final problem with these maps: The game ends when one player successfully secures their third, because there is almost no way for two teams to have thirds that aren't within siege tank fire of each other.
Even some of the better looking maps, such as the boneyard have this same problem.
+ Show Spoiler +
This part looks great, it's easy for zerg to take a natural, so they aren't forced to 1base roaches to expand. Even your teammate is able to take a natural without too many extra lanes of attack, even if it is a low ground natural(seriously, we have to take what we can get at this point).
+ Show Spoiler +
Sadly, it becomes extremely difficult once you start adding the second and third bases.
+ Show Spoiler +
Anyone who is able to take and hold those thirds is going to be easily able to deny an enemy trying to take the mirroring thirds.
Because of these two factors, the inability to take safe thirds, and the closeness of bases, 2v2 devolves into the matchup we see today. 1 Base rushes are heavily focused upon, and most games end with a single engagement. Even macro games will end after the first clash, because there is no time to rebuild a defensive force before the enemy is in your base. Those games that do continue on are simply fights for who can hold the center of the map, and therefor take their third, which are usually gold bases to further exasperate this issue. How many players have had matches where they trade their army, but are still able to secure a third during the attack? In 2v2s this is impossible, because the team with the surviving army steamrolls into your third which is located in the middle of the map. Take a look back at that 2v2 Map pooland see how many 3rds are literally equidistant from both bases, and then look at the 1v1 map pool and tell me how many 3rds(or even 4ths) are that way?
I am appealing to you all. 2v2 may not be as serious as 1v1s, but it still deserves to have maps that allow it to prosper and grow. If we where still stuck with Steppes of War, I can confidently say we would not see the macro games we have been accustomed on it. The same is true for 2v2 games, which unfortunately have not had the opportunity for the community to make maps or at least pressured blizzard to try harder. The changes made to the 1v1 ladder over the last year have shown that we have the power to make maps change for the better. Don't just sweep 2v2s under the rug, what could happen with balanced maps will surprise you.
edits from the community:
On March 12 2012 14:36 intrigue wrote:i made a thread about this about this same time a year ago =P teamgame maps in sc2 are just terrible and unimaginative. you guys know that 4v4 map district 10? now that could be an interesting 2v2 map!
Thanks to Toboe for the poll!
On February 08 2012 00:43 th3rogue wrote:As a tournament organizer, please tell me what 2v2 maps that we should use that are available right now? 
Currently in the Season 5 map pool:
 Discord IV
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Discord IVNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (72) 81% Tournament Ready (6) 7% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (6) 7% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (5) 6% 89 total votes Your vote: Discord IV (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
High Orbit
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: High OrbitNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (54) 69% Tournament Ready (13) 17% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (6) 8% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (5) 6% 78 total votes Your vote: High Orbit (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
Lunar Colony V
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Lunar Colony VNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (62) 78% Tournament Ready (10) 13% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (4) 5% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (3) 4% 79 total votes Your vote: Lunar Colony V (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
Magma Core
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Magma CoreNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (43) 61% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (14) 20% Tournament Ready (9) 13% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (4) 6% 70 total votes Your vote: Magma Core (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
Scorched Haven
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Scorched HavenSituationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (41) 53% Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (21) 27% Tournament Ready (13) 17% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (2) 3% 77 total votes Your vote: Scorched Haven (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
The Boneyard
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: The BoneyardNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (48) 75% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (11) 17% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (4) 6% Tournament Ready (1) 2% 64 total votes Your vote: The Boneyard (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
The Ruins of Tarsonis
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: The Ruins of TarsonisNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (37) 57% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (19) 29% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (7) 11% Tournament Ready (2) 3% 65 total votes Your vote: The Ruins of Tarsonis (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
Tyrador Keep
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Tyrador KeepNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (31) 48% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (18) 28% Tournament Ready (12) 18% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (4) 6% 65 total votes Your vote: Tyrador Keep (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
From the current z33k 2v2 weekly map pool:
ICCup Citadel of Gaia
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: ICCup Citadel of GaiaTournament Ready (38) 75% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (6) 12% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (4) 8% Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (3) 6% 51 total votes Your vote: ICCup Citadel of Gaia (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
Twilight Fortress
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Twilight FortressTournament Ready (36) 60% Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (16) 27% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (7) 12% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (1) 2% 60 total votes Your vote: Twilight Fortress (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
From the TLMC:
Fields of Strife
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Fields of StrifeNot Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (17) 55% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (7) 23% Tournament Ready (5) 16% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (2) 6% 31 total votes Your vote: Fields of Strife (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
from the Collegiate Starleague season 5 map pool:
Tempest
+ Show Spoiler +Poll: Tempest Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments) (38) 73% Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map) (9) 17% Tournament Ready (3) 6% Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues) (2) 4% 52 total votes Your vote: Tempest (Vote): Tournament Ready
(Vote): Situationally Tournament Ready (only in map pools with downvotes, not as a necessary first map)
(Vote): Needs Minor Physical Adjustments (rocks added/removed, golds<->blues)
(Vote): Not Tournament Worthy (needs major changes including ramp size and location adjustments)
|
Yeah, the 2v2 (and team game in general) maps suck hard. That's really why I stopped playing them, because it didn't feel like Starcraft 2, it felt like a trial version of the game that wasn't allowed to advance past "8 minute roach/zealot/stalker push"
|
The map pool issue - which you've described perfectly - is just one of the many symptoms. Team games are being treated with utter neglect.
Blizzard has repeatedly shown what they think of the team games when they refused to approach the AT vs RT issue in any manner. To this day, they stand by their point that the implemented matchmaking fixes any problems while all team game formats suffer from various forms of abuse or plain lameness.
The community often doesn't help much, either. Though team games were very popular both in SC/BW and in WC3, there seems to be this common attitude of "who cares about 2vs2/3vs3/4vs4, 1vs1 is where all the fun is". While many, MANY players, especially in the lower leagues, will have hundreds of team games played yet barely ever touch the 1vs1 ladder (I'm one of those). There's a huge demographic enjoying them, but they get little to no support.
|
I also forgot to mention that Lunar Colony V, the map in which I go into detail about, was added in season 4. So Blizzard is certainly not getting any better at releasing usable 2v2 maps. It really pains me when people dismiss 2v2 as a worthless matchup. The reason that 2v2 is a cheesefest isn't because of it's inherent unworthiness, but because of these poorly designed ladder maps. Especially with leagues such as CSL banning double racing(ie TZ, TP, and ZP are the only valid race choices) really opens the game up to some very unique plays and unit compositions. However, these unit compositions are often impossible to get if you can't secure your natural.
|
Great job posting this
Yeah, i feel so too. I feel exactly the same when me and my brother or friend play 2v2's - we actually determine who will be 1 base aggressive and who will take the expansion before the game. This really narrows the strategic options in the game...
If Blizzard doesn't care, I suggest that some good map builders start building maps for 2v2's and posting them, and letting people try 'em out. I feel like this can raise awareness and create more pressure on Blizzard.
|
good stuff, I don't team game any more but in part it's because they have terrible map design. nice analysis, perhaps one day blizzard will learn that "casuals" can enjoy maps balanced for pros just as much as they can enjoy casual maps.
|
On February 07 2012 17:45 Blindo wrote:2v2s are beginning to be added to many team leagues, most notably the Collegiate StarLeague, however they are still dealing with an extremely bad map pool. Because of the map pool, we have an extremely all-in based match up. As many of you will remember, the 1v1 ladder maps at release where quite terrible, many of which encouraged 1 or 2 base all ins. Can you imagine if we still had to play on Steppes of War? Well if your a 2v2 player, you don't have to. + Show Spoiler +Remember me?
Steppes of War was bad because it was imbalanced in favor of terran, not because it was a rush map. I would love to have some balanced rush friendly 1on1 maps if it were possible.
Just because a map promotes aggression and map control instead of no rush 20 min games doesn't make it bad.
|
On February 07 2012 18:06 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 17:45 Blindo wrote:2v2s are beginning to be added to many team leagues, most notably the Collegiate StarLeague, however they are still dealing with an extremely bad map pool. Because of the map pool, we have an extremely all-in based match up. As many of you will remember, the 1v1 ladder maps at release where quite terrible, many of which encouraged 1 or 2 base all ins. Can you imagine if we still had to play on Steppes of War? Well if your a 2v2 player, you don't have to. + Show Spoiler +Remember me? Steppes of War was bad because it was imbalanced in favor of terran, not because it was a rush map. I would love to have some balanced rush friendly 1on1 maps if it were possible. Just because a map promotes aggression and map control instead of no rush 20 min games doesn't make it bad.
But why was the map imbalanced for Terran players? For the same reason as close positions Metal and Shattered where. As a Terran player, I can say that any map where I have the ability to siege your natural with only a couple of leapfrogs is a map I feel like I have a solid advantage on. Look at games like MMA vs Sen at Blizzcon, those are the only kind of games we can have in 2v2s.
When people say that 2v2s are only for casuals, I would ask them to look at a 2v2 masters division. Most of the top players are masters, if not grandmasters, 1v1. There are several members of Gosu in my 2v2 masters division, such as PokeBuni. 2v2 is starting to be a part of major tournaments, such as the CSL, and certainly has the opportunity to become more than a casual diversion.
|
SC2 really needs some team maps more like python or fighting spirit. Where all the bases are totally separate but still give you a chance to take and defend 3rd and allows for some interesting attacking and counter attack early on.
They need to move away from the shared mains or never get past the 1 base push direct at each other and the match is over after 1 fight.
|
Wouldn't shared bases discourage 1 base rushes? If you are separated the rushing team can just kill one of you before the teammate can get over to help...
|
Completely agree about everything you wrote, been a constant frustration of mine when playing team games. Shared bases help, but most of the maps have few viable expansions anyway so its just a later rush.
|
My impression is that for regular players, 2v2 is the most popular format to play. It would be great if they rethought the maps.
I'd also like to see some tournaments incorporate 2s and if they did it might put some pressure on Blizzard to improve the team matchmaking and maps. I think 2s would work well in the the team leagues. The way it works in the CSL right now is the 3rd match is a 2v2 match and you can't reuse players in the 2s in any of the singles except the ace, like normal. What has been happening is lower skilled players that practice together as a team are defeating better skilled players who just joined up for that one game, which is interesting to see.
|
On February 07 2012 18:13 Blindo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:06 VoirDire wrote:On February 07 2012 17:45 Blindo wrote:2v2s are beginning to be added to many team leagues, most notably the Collegiate StarLeague, however they are still dealing with an extremely bad map pool. Because of the map pool, we have an extremely all-in based match up. As many of you will remember, the 1v1 ladder maps at release where quite terrible, many of which encouraged 1 or 2 base all ins. Can you imagine if we still had to play on Steppes of War? Well if your a 2v2 player, you don't have to. + Show Spoiler +Remember me? Steppes of War was bad because it was imbalanced in favor of terran, not because it was a rush map. I would love to have some balanced rush friendly 1on1 maps if it were possible. Just because a map promotes aggression and map control instead of no rush 20 min games doesn't make it bad. But why was the map imbalanced for Terran players? For the same reason as close positions Metal and Shattered where. As a Terran player, I can say that any map where I have the ability to siege your natural with only a couple of leapfrogs is a map I feel like I have a solid advantage on. Look at games like MMA vs Sen at Blizzcon, those are the only kind of games we can have in 2v2s. When people say that 2v2s are only for casuals, I would ask them to look at a 2v2 masters division. Most of the top players are masters, if not grandmasters, 1v1. There are several members of Gosu in my 2v2 masters division, such as PokeBuni. 2v2 is starting to be a part of major tournaments, such as the CSL, and certainly has the opportunity to become more than a casual diversion.
I don't understand your point. Are you saying that terran tank pushes are imbalanced in 2v2? (They aren't)
|
On February 07 2012 18:39 VoirDire wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2012 18:13 Blindo wrote:On February 07 2012 18:06 VoirDire wrote:On February 07 2012 17:45 Blindo wrote:2v2s are beginning to be added to many team leagues, most notably the Collegiate StarLeague, however they are still dealing with an extremely bad map pool. Because of the map pool, we have an extremely all-in based match up. As many of you will remember, the 1v1 ladder maps at release where quite terrible, many of which encouraged 1 or 2 base all ins. Can you imagine if we still had to play on Steppes of War? Well if your a 2v2 player, you don't have to. + Show Spoiler +Remember me? Steppes of War was bad because it was imbalanced in favor of terran, not because it was a rush map. I would love to have some balanced rush friendly 1on1 maps if it were possible. Just because a map promotes aggression and map control instead of no rush 20 min games doesn't make it bad. But why was the map imbalanced for Terran players? For the same reason as close positions Metal and Shattered where. As a Terran player, I can say that any map where I have the ability to siege your natural with only a couple of leapfrogs is a map I feel like I have a solid advantage on. Look at games like MMA vs Sen at Blizzcon, those are the only kind of games we can have in 2v2s. When people say that 2v2s are only for casuals, I would ask them to look at a 2v2 masters division. Most of the top players are masters, if not grandmasters, 1v1. There are several members of Gosu in my 2v2 masters division, such as PokeBuni. 2v2 is starting to be a part of major tournaments, such as the CSL, and certainly has the opportunity to become more than a casual diversion. I don't understand your point. Are you saying that terran tank pushes are imbalanced in 2v2? (They aren't)
I was trying to say that maps in which you spawn close to your opponent will almost never yield long games. On large maps, it's possible to have more dynamic back and forth fighting for a couple of reasons.
First, there is the possibility to reinforce a retreating army, or muster new defenders after an engagement in the center of a large map. On most of the 2v2 maps, and maps like close spawns Shattered Temple or Steppes of War, once you have a large engagement, the game is over. This is because since your bases are so close, you'll be able to move from the battle field to someone's mineral line before they can pump out a wave of units.
Second, on maps where you spawn close to your opponent, there is rarely a reliable third to take. Let's look at close positions Metal for example. You can take your normal naturals, but not your normal thirds because not only are they equidistant between you, but they are also right beside your opponents base. This forces you to take the close air main as your third. Compare the additional space you have to control when you do this, to how much you would have to control to take your normal third in a cross positions match. Most of times this means in order to take a third, you need to already be far ahead, or have an opponent with deficient scouting.
I MSPainted this in case my descriptions suck. If you look you can see how much additional land you have to hold in order to secure a third. This is essentially the same problem with the 2s maps. You're required to hold at least half the map in order to take a third.
+ Show Spoiler +
Imagine if every time you played Metal or Temple that the only positions where close spawns. That's what playing 2v2s feels like.
|
It's kind of funny you are comparing Blizzard made 2v2 maps with a 1v1 map that isn't done by them
But playing 2v2 with a friend I can relate to this post, most of the maps are simply terrible.
|
2v2 maps for me are solely a way to practice 1 base rushes and 2 base all-ins. They're just designed to prevent you from intuitively doing anything else without committing suicide to anyone with half a brain.
|
I love to play a macro oriented 2v2 but it is just not possible if the enemies execute their all-in strategies well.
I'm very high master with a friend and we have 90% winrate if the opponents do not all-in rush and pretty much 50:50 if the opponents do so.
I find team games more interesting than 1v1 these days, so if there would be a better map pool the games would be more legit.
Our solution against all-in play is playing early tanks + 3 gate robo with a lot of forcefields. That way we can defend against pretty much anything and it is on the opponents to execute well or to trick us.
|
entertaining
User was warned for this post
|
Agree.
Often the maps give you a small number of viable expansions (often a single natural, or sometimes a natural per player) but third bases that are very far away, and often as close to you as to your opponents. As zerg, I often end up in a situation where a TP team or something (TT or PP similar) take their easy expansions and bunker/tank up. I then want to take a third, but it is so easily denied. I feel like I have to either end the game before they get their natural up, or some BL rush from 2 bases or something... At least at my diamond 2on2 RT level, it feels very frustrating sometimes.
edit: haha Karl, funny how you describe the other side of my problem.
|
Nice post, +1 OP. The 2v2 map pool is a little ridiculous for all ins, yes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/d/d6/Steppes_of_War.jpg/400px-Steppes_of_War.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/c/ce/Tal%27darim_Altar_LE.jpg/600px-Tal%27darim_Altar_LE.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/3/3f/Lunar_Colony_V.jpg/600px-Lunar_Colony_V.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ldErA.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yU6Dm.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lSVmP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7fQnV.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lLTTT.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/89Gpy.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/act7k.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TFghd.jpg)
