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.
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.
I would love to play metal or temple close position if it was balanced (which it isn't).
In 1on1, as a zerg I build 4 lings, drones and infrastructure in the exact same BO in 80% of all my zvp games. I mean exactly the same down to every individual drone I make. I can't break a forge FE and P can't deny my 3rd, so the first 8-9 minutes of virtually every zvp game I play there is no variety at all. I wish I could just skip it and go straight for the mid-game. It's like playing chess where it takes 8 minutes just to set up the pieces before playing.
I rather play a 10 minute 2on2 game where I can open 10pool speedlings and use my units within 3 minutes than a 15 minute 1on1 game where I just play sim city the first 8 minutes.
Playing meaningless games are a travesty to competition.
I agree with this sentiment. My 2v2 partner and I have played over 200 games this season, and we've tried all kinds of different things, but the conclusion I've almost always come to on maps is "they're just too small and/or it's way too difficult to hold an expo, so we have to just attack."
The only map I think is okay in the pool is Tyrador Keep:
It feels like the biggest map by far, and it has the most defendable natural layouts.
The map pool really needs an overhaul IMO. For both 1v1 and 2v2.
CortoMontez Australia. February 07 2012 21:20. Posts 608
On February 07 2012 21:14 Dromar wrote: I agree with this sentiment. My 2v2 partner and I have played over 200 games this season, and we've tried all kinds of different things, but the conclusion I've almost always come to on maps is "they're just too small and/or it's way too difficult to hold an expo, so we have to just attack."
The only map I think is okay in the pool is Tyrador Keep:
It feels like the biggest map by far, and it has the most defendable natural layouts.
The map pool really needs an overhaul IMO. For both 1v1 and 2v2.
Although this one has a somewhat defendable natural, the fact that is has backdoor rocks means it is one of the three 2v2 maps that I downvote, the other two being the other maps with backdoor rocks...
And there are almost no maps on which you can even take a natural...
"Creator was doing a really good job trying to win without storm but it was like eating spaghetti with a screwdriver." -Severian
Nice thread I couldn't agree more. 2v2 is what I put the most into along with a friend, but the maps make it really hard to move beyond 10min 1basing, at least now that we've hit masters it has become very difiicult to play a macro game.
Just when I thought I was out, Blizz pulled me back in..
Eatme Switzerland. February 07 2012 21:42. Posts 3748
On February 07 2012 18:14 Frenzy175 wrote: 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.
So extremely much this. I really hate that you cant counter in 2:2. If the opponents manage to get in to your allys base they are in your base too and you only have one option while on 2:2 in bw you could counter while your ally died slowly. In some of the 3:3 maps you can still counter and thats why I mostly play 3:3. But you should try 2:2 on shattered temple, it is waay more fun than the maps in the 2:2 pool.
As some of you mentioned the two new maps added in season 4 were horrible, but the worst thing is that blizzard said that they changed them to make naturals easier to take when you atleast had a possibility to take nats and play 2base on the maps they removed. If you look at their track record I fear even shittier maps for all types of teamgames if they start to meddle with the map pool.
I have the best fucking lawyers in the country including the man they call the Malmis.
On February 07 2012 21:42 Eatme wrote: So extremely much this. I really hate that you cant counter in 2:2. If the opponents manage to get in to your allys base they are in your base too and you only have one option while on 2:2 in bw you could counter while your ally died slowly. In some of the 3:3 maps you can still counter and thats why I mostly play 3:3.
Yeah, 3v3 has the best maps and the new ones are good enough. 2v2 is pure shit in comparison.
taintmachine United States. February 07 2012 22:04. Posts 415
the only 2v2 map i can think of that had a lot of safe bases was twilight fortress (beta), and people complained about it. most of my games on that map were pretty long, and allins usually only worked b/c the ramp was very wide (took a while to wall it)
I really don't understand why most of the team maps are designed in a way that prevents you from taking expansions. Not a single map encourages you to opt for a macro game.
✉ Tweets @sc2channel ⌦ Blog: http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/JOJO ⌫ "Arbiterssss... build more arbiterssss." Click 'Profile' for awesome shiro art!
HyDrA_solic Portugal. February 07 2012 22:06. Posts 314
I agree with you, by saying that 2v2 map pool, atm sucks real hard along with the current metagame (all inning at 8minute mark and stuff). However, we need to pass through that, like we did with Steppes and Jungle Basin. Play the map as it supposed to be, not how you want to play.
For example: I have a 2v2 Top 2 Master Team. We play some games for fun, we vetoed some maps, but we kinda like Lunar Colony. We both Zerg, and we already know that in certain matchups, we can double expand, in other we cannot. We already had some 30+ macro games there, as also, we defended a lot of all ins there (and lost to some ofc).
Learn to play the map, according to it's flaws. And then, pressure Blizzard to make more maps. They don't need to be the perfect maps, then again, 2v2 is still far behind for 1v1 metagame, but still, with more maps, with more variation, we'll learn more.
And, 2v2 is fun
It's all about the reflections of freedom. Even though he hoped for a better world, with all his strenght, all his will, the most he could do was to make her smile.
2v2ApexKillaR Germany. February 07 2012 22:10. Posts 88
me and my mates micky and crusader top10world, always go over the maps and try to explain tactics, adjusted to each map and matchup. maybe u guys wanna tune in and listen to our while-playing-commentary
On February 07 2012 22:05 JOJOsc2news wrote: I really don't understand why most of the team maps are designed in a way that prevents you from taking expansions. Not a single map encourages you to opt for a macro game.
Scorched Haven, where "macro game" means "2 base allin". :D
Nekratos Singapore. February 07 2012 22:15. Posts 16
On February 07 2012 22:05 JOJOsc2news wrote: I really don't understand why most of the team maps are designed in a way that prevents you from taking expansions. Not a single map encourages you to opt for a macro game.
Scorched Haven, where "macro game" means "2 base allin". :D
Exactly. Whilst you might be able to somewhat secure a natural on Scorched Haven, the map is still designed in a way that screams in your face "Do NOT make anymore expansions!!!!"
✉ Tweets @sc2channel ⌦ Blog: http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/JOJO ⌫ "Arbiterssss... build more arbiterssss." Click 'Profile' for awesome shiro art!
Grovbolle Denmark. February 07 2012 22:17. Posts 2599
GIVE ME COMMAND - Lies, damned lies and statistics: http://aligulac.com - @Sc2Aligulac - "I don't want Losira to go through because he is Zerg, but because he is Losira, he transcends all race" - TheBB
lolsil United States. February 07 2012 22:23. Posts 36
Ok, all team games map seem to small, another big problem is some maps, for example arkadan citadel in the 3v3 map pool, only has 2 bases that can be easily secured, so where does the 3rd player take his second base ? Especially when the 2 bases that can be secured cant be taken by a zerg with, for example 2 terran teammates, cause the creep covers the other base.. So Zerg has to expand, literally, in the middle of the map and just die to rushes every game. There are several other maps which also do not have enough expansions that can be secured even for the whole team to just have a second base without one expanding in the middle. Forget ever having a third unless the games already over.
Team games would be seriously more fun with better maps ! Expand or die trying !
P.S , Recent maps seems to be the worst ones T.T I miss Tempest apart from tanks could siege natural gas .
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/d/d6/Steppes_of_War.jpg/400px-Steppes_of_War.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TFghd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/4/4f/Tyrador_Keep.jpg/150px-Tyrador_Keep.jpg)
