EPT[M] 6m Devolution by Barrin
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
Also the natural seems to be kinda far from the main ramp meaning spine placement will be hard as I dont think they can cover both mineral line, and entrance to main as they should be able on every map in my opinion. Otherwise seems like a cool map. | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
 Cool map, altho some parts look awkward aesthetically as far as I can tell from the overview. Obviously can't comment on balance lol | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
dudecrush
Canada418 Posts
| ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
On March 21 2012 02:50 Barrin wrote: That bunker strategy is just as viable in say Shattered Temple, Metalopolis (and many other maps), why never see it there? Was there somekind of misunderstanding? In your map this happens ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yXKmx.jpg) I cant see how something like that is possible on the other maps. Or now that i think of it the 1st bunker is not even necerssary, as it can be just 1 or 2 marines there. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
OldManSenex
United States130 Posts
Also, having your natural denied on this map is not the worst thing ever for the zerg, because the 3rd is close and easy enough to take that it's only a little more dangerous than the natural. Obviously you'd have to watch out for a second bunker or cannon rush denying that base as well, but so long as you get the cancel on your natural it's not the worst position ever to be in. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
Anyway I'm glad this map thread is finally up so I can link people to it! I've been noticing problems with PvZ. The rocks at the third are usually dead by the time you get there so it's open and scary, usually requiring precious cannons. Walling the natural and going through the rocks can be very powerful but it's susceptible to two pronged attacks or just bouncing back and forth. I think that might be the best option though. However, mutalisks are an absolute nightmare in that scenario because the natural is so exposed, and the flock numbers quickly overwhelm cannons at your wallin, your main, your corner expo, your corner walloff, etc etc. Obviously we need more testing! But it's pretty hard at the moment. I have to send you some replays and watch all those you posted, very excited. ;D | ||
|
Thaniri
1264 Posts
I wish I had more people close to my level to play against. The 7m channel seems to be full of masters already in a game or a bunch of noobs. | ||
|
Natespank
Canada449 Posts
1- awesome awesome awesome critique: 2- gas steals. Specifically, in PvP, a protoss who gas steals and follows up with a 4 gate would be terrifying, or a terran gas stealing a protoss and then 5rax marine rushing him. The only way to defend such strategies is to use gas units. Might be fine, just saying, it's the first thing that comes to mind for me  | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On March 21 2012 06:46 Natespank wrote: First impressions: 1- awesome awesome awesome critique: 2- gas steals. Specifically, in PvP, a protoss who gas steals and follows up with a 4 gate would be terrifying, or a terran gas stealing a protoss and then 5rax marine rushing him. The only way to defend such strategies is to use gas units. Might be fine, just saying, it's the first thing that comes to mind for me 3 gate is the max amount of production you can do on 1 base. I'm not sure what the best response would be for a gas steal, but I have a feeling it might be expand with cannons. Really you shouldn't let it happen because it's so important. Terran couldn't steal effectively because you can kill the scv as it builds, but it'd be worth testing as a cheese option. You should go try it out! So many things to check. ;D Oh, and Barrin, the version of 6m1hyg Devolution up now has a doodad malfunction at the natural in the bottom left. There's a giant floating mar sara dead tree. It's spooky! And also distracting. | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
I don't think a 4 gate or a 5rax build is possible with that many mineral patches. (?) There might be issues with this setup, but its not going to be due to strategies we have seen already. Thats why this is exciting to me; new gameplay. EDIT: I have been playing/obsing this for the last couple of hours. this could be totally revolutionary... | ||
|
clever_us
United States329 Posts
| ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
 | ||
|
emc
United States3088 Posts
On March 21 2012 07:57 EatThePath wrote: 3 gate is the max amount of production you can do on 1 base. I'm not sure what the best response would be for a gas steal, but I have a feeling it might be expand with cannons. Really you shouldn't let it happen because it's so important. Terran couldn't steal effectively because you can kill the scv as it builds, but it'd be worth testing as a cheese option. You should go try it out! So many things to check. ;D Oh, and Barrin, the version of 6m1hyg Devolution up now has a doodad malfunction at the natural in the bottom left. There's a giant floating mar sara dead tree. It's spooky! And also distracting. I'm going to gas steal every game as zerg, see how fun it is | ||
|
RumbleBadger
322 Posts
Great job on that analysis and also this map looks very fun too. I'll have to play it to really get a feel for it though. | ||
|
RoarMan
Canada745 Posts
| ||
|
ChristianS
United States3295 Posts
tl;dr: IMHO, 7m2g and/or 6m2g are both a viable change in the future and a good change in the future. 7m1g or 6m1g are both not viable and not necessarily good for the game. All the same, good luck to you, Barrin, as I'm certain you know more about map-making than me. | ||
|
-NegativeZero-
United States2142 Posts
On March 21 2012 09:04 ChristianS wrote: I thought you were advocating for 6m/2g? 8m may be replaceable in Starcraft II, but 2g is essential to pretty much everything in the development of SCII up to this point. And honestly, 2g generates a lot of interesting strategy that wasn't present in brood war. In your other article you were advocating for 7m/2g shifting towards 6m/2g to reduce the suddenness of transition, and I'm all in favor, but a sudden jump to 6m/1g just won't happen (and maybe shouldn't). Pro players won't do such a drastic change just to play in tournaments that won't switch to them, and tournaments won't switch and alienate all their players that practiced for 8m/2g. A tournament might consider announcing 7m/2g beforehand and then playing on it (a 12.5% reduction in minerals), maybe transitioning to 6m/2g later (a 25% reduction in minerals), but I don't see any transition to 1g (a 50% reduction in gas!) in the near future. tl;dr: IMHO, 7m2g and/or 6m2g are both a viable change in the future and a good change in the future. 7m1g or 6m1g are both not viable and not necessarily good for the game. All the same, good luck to you, Barrin, as I'm certain you know more about map-making than me. I'm pretty sure on the 1g maps it's a high yield gas (6 gas per trip), creating a 25% reduction in gas which is exactly proportional to the removal of 2 mineral patches. | ||
| ||
