[M] (4) Apollo

On January 02 2013 20:56 Zrana wrote:
I like the way the paths to close spawns undulate around a lot, so close and cross spawns are both relatively equal except for air. This map looks very well made imo

I personally think protoss 2 base timings would be very harsh here vs zerg; if the protoss gets just a sentry and a handful of units up that ramp the hatchery and drones are lost. Yet if the ramp were made any wider protoss would be incredibly vulnerable to stephano style roach timings. I suppose zerg could take the 4th as a 3rd, but the path to reinforcing it from main+nat is quite long and circuitous. Having said that the protoss 2base all-ins have being seen less success of late and maybe this kind of map is what's needed to maintain balance.

Also an angled view would be great; i have no idea what's going on in the middle, do the ramps go up and then back down or just up to the middle like antiga?

On January 02 2013 22:35 Superouman wrote:

wowowowowow this is so sick, so genius

please tell me it works 100%

On January 02 2013 23:05 Semmo wrote:


Yay Superouman!! Thanks! :D
it works 100%! Etc, that's why I put 2 so you can't do top and bottom. You'll need at least 3 to block the 1x ramp.

And as a toss player you shouldn't worry about third in PvZ; it's really easy to Sim City, man. just simcity and take base yo.

Also, you can stack ultras which means you can basically make a choke indefinitely forcefield-proof.

On January 03 2013 00:59 Samro225am wrote:


the ultra-on-choke idea is very nice indeed, yet i thing the imbalance after third base is quite obvious in close spawn situations. layout is so-so really. so basically you take the four bases close to you, even in close spawn, because it would be terrible to maneuver around if you try to expand away exclusively. expanding towards does not look that bad really, so i think this would be viable.

On January 03 2013 01:33 Semmo wrote:


Firstly, why do you think that expanding away from your opponent is not viable? I think they can take it just fine.. They have an advantage from the harrasser in that they have a choke to defend - most of the expansions are singlr entrance.

Secondly, the fourths don't have to be standard in every map... And its just that one spawn is difficult, but even so its probably not harder than antiga.

Why do you think it is a bad layout? :[ I thought i used chokes and bases appropriately and promoted movement rather than stayinone place and defend. I am not sure if there is a layout that enables all spawns AND is small and cozy thqt is vastly different from this, while promoting movement and not turtle (so no inbase)

On January 03 2013 01:50 Samro225am wrote:


imbalance is the worng word, sorry. what i want to say is that you do not really have an option for third, there will always be one base to go to first and then you will take the other close by base (your fourth). you will not want to expand away into the next quarter (of the map), because your pathing is a bit odd there. the player with map control will easily dominant expansions that stretch our so far. if you can secure four bases, you basically control even more potentially. that is why i say the layout is so-so. i did not write that i think it is bad! in most game situations the map is played through the middle. it is a bit one dimensional. getting caught on the side path, imagine that. also you can react pretty easily from the area in front of your nat to both third options etc.

what i would like to see really (what i think is a better layout) is a more complex pathwork that allows thirds to be controlled, while also a bit harder. try to no have long paths that limit movement too much.

On January 03 2013 02:5ChaZzza wrote:
i really like the tileset and the design but as a zergie i dont like the entrace to the third. it just wouldn't be defensible. you could however, rotate the ramp so it points toward the natural...