As a suggestion, focus less on maps (and therefore focus less on winning) and more on improving and growth.
[D] Zerg map down votes, season 6 - Page 3
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
doss
Canada137 Posts
As a suggestion, focus less on maps (and therefore focus less on winning) and more on improving and growth. | ||
Sway.746
United States95 Posts
Entombed Valley has ridiculous tank pushes still and promotes turtley games ZvT and ZvP. I'm over Shattered Temple. Played enough games on it and I'm bored of it. Shakuras... I have mixed feelings, but would rather play other maps. | ||
rebuffering
Canada2436 Posts
| ||
templar rage
United States2509 Posts
| ||
neoghaleon55
United States7434 Posts
This map is stupid. | ||
Elem
Sweden4717 Posts
Korhal is kinda annoying ZvP but it feels free win in ZvT. Same for Cloud Kingdom. | ||
Tal0n
United States175 Posts
| ||
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On February 16 2012 05:25 Tal0n wrote: i love this thread because now i can avoid playing zvz on ladder a little more The maps you veto don't effect the matchups you get. You are first found an opponent, and then the map is chosen from the pool of maps that neither of you have vetoed. I'm thinking antiga for sure, but not sure what to veto between cloud kingdom, korhal, and entombed. | ||
DeepElemBlues
United States5076 Posts
2nd veto: Metalopolis, too constricted 3rd veto: None, I don't mind Entombed Valley that huge wide open middle is pretty nice. | ||
llKenZyll
United States853 Posts
So I definetely veto'd that map. It's too tight anyway, hard to get a good position and its also way too good for force fields. Same problem that typhon peaks had. I am also vetoing Shakuras and Shattered Temple. Shakuras ZvT has always been an issue for me, the terran can just put tanks on the ledge and I can't do shit about it. Sure, I can lob infested terrans up there with my infestors, but that's about it. For Shattered Temple, it is hard to get a third in response to a protoss FFE, I usually just go for some 2 base baneling drop all in. It's pretty gimmicky too, especially with the gold. It's good in the late game, but getting to the late game on that map is pretty hard. | ||
Greenhit
United States200 Posts
| ||
Mutable
Canada5 Posts
Buck up sissy pants! because of your down voting I get less diversity when i play you... sad face ... And please dont bring up that art of war bs : A good general choose his fights and never engage a fight he cant win. A good general wouldnt abandon a whole country(map) just becasue its hard to defend he would use his disadvantage as a bait and counter his predictable oponent with special tactics. Special tactics!!! I may not be a good exemple since I did not play much of 1v1 but I never down voted a map, not even incineration zone or steppes of war... they all brought crazy games and made me learn things i wouldnt have considered otherwise. Bad map is no excuse for bad sportsmanship, just think on your feet and embrace the challenge of defeating an oponnent with a disadvantage. now i feel nostlagic for desert oasis... Vetos are for sissy pants and politicians, do not endulge | ||
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
1. Shattered Temple. No question the worst map ever, I've always vetoed this. Protoss FFE is just a huge pain in the ass, yes, roach/ling all-in is stronger but just as always toss just scouts, and even if he is an idiot, you are just hoping he doesn't make 2 cannons (or 4 depending on version). The problem, is that you can't take a fast third (at least not without considerable cost or danger). Toss also takes a free third, and their fourth is also free, and a gold no less. In ZvT it's a pain that the map is fairly straightforward with little ability to counterattack. Any map where you can't counterattack is broken ZvT, that's why Shakuras was removed (at least shakuras is big macro map though with lots of space for mutas). ZvZ is pretty lame when you can't take a third before lair either. It's just low econ muta vs muta wars. I suppose it's not impossible to take a third though, since you should have units out by ~50 supply, but it just delays it. Not the worst ZvZ map tbh, but lack of counterattacks on third is kind of lame. 2. Antiga Shipyard. Tournamen version would be okay, but the 2/3 chance of close spawn is absolutely broken in so many ways. ZvZ, it's straight up broken for one of the players - it means one guy can attack towards the third or natural, and the other has to defend at 2 different locations, while the other guy largely just has to defend the choke to his natural. Totally screwed up, not just in ZvZ, but every match-up. ZvT... siege tanks from main to third, or third to main, is a total joke. Not to mention dropship play where they turret up their third/main, siege up in third/main, and then drop marines onto your side. That just sucks. And then putting up turrets at their third/main, and using it as a way to deny muta harass/effectiveness while dropping to your side. What a joke. Not to mention Terran can just take an easy fourth in the gold, while your fourth is really far and hard to protect on certain close spawns (actually both close spawns, even harder when it's his third - your main). For ZvP, the map is fairly imbalanced in favor of zerg, when against FFE. Zerg just takes the gold as his third, and due to the nature of FFE, Toss can't punish it. Forcefields at the third are a bit annoying. Close spawn in general against Toss is a pain though, and is true on this map too. Way too close. If it was only cross positions, and then they removed the gold due to imbalance of fast fourth gold by T, impossibility of Z ever taking gold in ZvT due to central location and T just turtling it up, and imbalance of fast gold vs FFE in favor of Zerg, then the map would be okay. Why it's still in the broken form it is, I don't know. 3. Entombed Valley. Not the worst map in the world, but I absolutely hate how stupidly easy it is for Toss to take their third. They just open some stupid all-in (or super greedy fast third play), and if their all-in fails (or going super fast cheesy third) they just make 4 sentries and take it with no problem. A little too easy for Toss to take their third. While the Zerg third is somewhat easy, the rocks make it unfair that Zerg has to deal with the damn rocks, while Toss gets a super easy third. If you are going to make the Toss third easy, you need to make Zerg third and fourth easy too (and zergs fourth isn't too easy). Close spawn laterally though, is a total fucking joke. 1/3rd of the time, but still too much. Longitudinal spawn is okay, a little too short, pretty bad, but not as bad as ST or close spawn Antiga. Now onto what I think of the other maps: TDA. Sieging the natural is always a huge pain in the ass, especially when there are rocks at the third denying you from just temporarily transferring drones to deal with the push. A small imbalance, but made up for in huge map size. I wish the rocks weren't at the third, but maybe that's bias, as I know the GSL used to not have rocks there, and then put them there after something obviously showed to them that it was imbalanced not to have rocks there. Toss taking the third is a bit too easy. In general the attacker has too strong a positional advantage against the defender when fighting against the third (a huge pain in the ass in ZvZ infestor battles). Going fast third is a HUGE pain in the ass in ZvP, a good blink stalker all-in will kill you since the long rally times of taking a far third or killing your econ to break the rocks, but this is somewhat made up for due to how amazing mutalisks (and therefore 2 base muta) can be on this map. Metalopolis. This map I think is imbalanced in favor of Zerg in ZvP. If Toss actually goes FFE, I just take the gold as my natural in a fast third style of play. No way an equally skilled Toss will ever win, ever. Against gateway expands, the normal third is pretty easy to hold, and counterattacking the Toss third is somewhat easy, so it's a bit more balanced, but imo still zerg favored. In ZvT, Terran taking the gold as 3rd or 4th is a bit imbalanced, while denying Zerg from taking it. This map seriously needs to get rid of the Gold, but I usually enjoy the imbalance rather than suffer from it (toss going FFE on that map is more common than super lategame ZvT, and I have great ZvT). Shakuras Plateau. Nice ZvP map. Nice ZvZ map. Terrible, absolutely trash ZvT map. You can never counterattack, so it doesn't matter how disastrous the early game is for Terran, they just get enough siege tanks, eventually take their third, turtle up, mass ghosts, then split the map and get a huge ghostball and win. Hopefully the patch will address this imbalance some, but it's still broken that you can't threaten counterattacks at all on this map. Just ruins high-level ZvT, completely broken. In lower levels this isn't a problem, even in mid-masters this isn't a problem, but when playing/observing with GMs or high masters, Terran just turtles up siege tanks, takes third, masses ghosts, wins. Not sure how Korhal or Cloud will be, but I look forward to them. Koral seems kind of like Arid Plateau, and I actually liked that map. I also kind of liked XNC, but there were imbalances on it due to map size and the gold and limited number of bases, which Korhal/Arid dealt with. I do wish I could veto TDA and Shakuras though, I feel like Zerg should get 2 extra vetos. | ||
error691
Netherlands1 Post
I actually miss maps like Scrap Station and Desert Oasis as they provided for interesting tactics...does anyone else have old maps they'd like to bring back, or instate a BW map (Paranoid Android)? | ||
neoghaleon55
United States7434 Posts
Tank and Thor rush is possible because natural to natural is so close together. | ||
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
yakitate304
United States655 Posts
| ||
KDot2
United States1213 Posts
| ||
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
But people want to play Shakuras Plateau, with the worst midfield for zerg of any map on the ladder except for maybe Cloud Kingdom? Man... People don't understand the power of choke points and high ground in the midfield, or rather, the power for terran and protoss. I'll take an opponent on 3 turtley, impossible to attack bases, rather then the 5-6 bases terrans usually enjoy on Shakuras - and thats not even talking about the obnoxious tanks-on-high-ground stuff. I veto Shakuras (too old, too chokey), Antiga (garbage imba map), and nothing else. I might veto Cloud Kingdom, and I really take issue with this map. Who thought it would be a good idea to FILL a map with high ground, and chokes that are totally walled off with 3 forcefields/3 thors? The multiple counter attack paths don't make a fucking difference when it is so easy for P and T to craft an army which can't be approached in these narrow corridors. Nearly every game I play vs mech or heavy-sentry-stuff turns into a base race because the only solution is avoiding the enemy army entirely. There are nearly no places for a 200/200 zerg army to fight favorably against a 200/200 T/P army. No favorable terrain. At all. On the entire map. Its pretty bad for melee units. Pretty awesome for long ranged deathballs though. | ||
6xFPCs
United States412 Posts
On February 16 2012 10:55 Belial88 wrote: [...] Shakuras Plateau. Nice ZvP map. Nice ZvZ map. Terrible, absolutely trash ZvT map. You can never counterattack, so it doesn't matter how disastrous the early game is for Terran, they just get enough siege tanks, eventually take their third, turtle up, mass ghosts, then split the map and get a huge ghostball and win. Hopefully the patch will address this imbalance some, but it's still broken that you can't threaten counterattacks at all on this map. Just ruins high-level ZvT, completely broken. In lower levels this isn't a problem, even in mid-masters this isn't a problem, but when playing/observing with GMs or high masters, Terran just turtles up siege tanks, takes third, masses ghosts, wins. [...] A good read, nice to hear your opinions on the maps, especially your analysis of Antiga. One question about Shakuras: why do you think it's a good ZvP map? ZvP-wise, it's always against FFE, and I feel like it's an inverted version of TDA, in that the third is easy to take, but hard to hold. A solid chunk of the time, I lose the third because I'm trying to keep up with FFE econ and underestimate how much he's sending to the third. But if I overmake units to hold off a few zeal/stalker, I end up behind and die to 5gate blink or 7 gate. My only solution thus far is go two-base muta with a macro hatch. Still, even then, it's so easy for P to sneak a pylon near the fourth and warp zealots into the third, or put cannons on the high ground near the minerals of the third. The only wins I have ZvP on shakuras are the odd muta harasses that kill lots of workers, muta-ling base race, and nydus/proxy hatch. Oh, and that guy who went dual robo immortals against my two-base muta. | ||
| ||