Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (75 users) | |
|
| Wilsonator February 18 2012 18:46. Posts 46 | Profile # |
Tyrador Keep in the 2v2 map pool seems to be the worst map in my opinion, and even is imbalanced depending on spawns in my opinion. The main reasons are:
-3rd expansion is impossible to secure since walk distances for defence are extremely long
-Siege tanks are far too effective when your ramp spawns near their in base natural
With the 3rd expansion being either the gold, getting a 3rd is extremely hard. The gold base is far to open in the back to be defended (and its a long walk to go defend). The 3rd base is such a long walk away there is no way to defend both your main your 3rd expo, unless you have a massive lead.
Siege tanks when your ramp is close to the in base natural of the opponent is unbelievable strong. With a banshee, overlord, observer, or even floating building you can shut down that expansion while defending your own main. Positioning your siege tanks there is not even inconvenient.
I know blizzard focuses on 1v1's but this map needs to be swapped in the 2v2 map pool, if anyone can explain to me why they like this map (other than being a terrain like myself and exploiting siege tanks) I would love to hear some opinions. |
|
|
| Broesl Austria. February 18 2012 19:08. Posts 70 | Profile # |
nobody cares for 2v2, including blizz, just veto it and dont worry about it
User was warned for this post |
|
|
| Mcrat Australia. February 18 2012 19:11. Posts 30 | Profile # |
For people thinking wtf is Tyrador Keep-
It's a six player 2v2 map, 1 easy expo for both players in each base.
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/4/4f/Tyrador_Keep.jpg/400px-Tyrador_Keep.jpg)
I assume with the siege tanks you're talking abuot the gold base in the bottom left of the map?
TBH I never noticed how close that gold was to the natural of the other base. If you can indeed siege that from your nat then I would agree the distance could be inched out so it wasn't in siege range.
Taking a third on this map is tricky yes (well 1 player gets gold, but the other one has to go find one in the unused base), so you should just plan around that and plan to end the game on 2 bases. Or contain the enemy so you are free to take the empty spawn base and then win from there.
IMO there are much worse maps out there (like Discord IV) but I do agree with you on the siege positioning being OP in that one circumstance.Last edit: 2012-02-18 19:12:14 |
| | "Paper is OP. Scissors are fine." - Rock |
|
|
| Wilsonator February 18 2012 19:13. Posts 46 | Profile # |
| If they are going to make a game that includes 2v2 then they should keep it up-kept. Also I am looking for a little more that just veto it an move on, that is not very constructive. By that logic if a bad map is in 1v1 we should all just veto it and they should leave it in. People like to play with friends, therefore they should keep the experience great. |
|
|
| Wilsonator February 18 2012 19:16. Posts 46 | Profile # |
| The bigger problem is siege'ing the back of the natural at the 7 o'clock. To respond the rocks have to be down, or you have to run all the way around to the right to defend. It gives a clear advantage depending on spawn locations |
|
|
| EMPaThy789 New Zealand. February 18 2012 19:20. Posts 846 | Profile # |
| Just veto it. Blizz switched out 1v1 maps based on vetos and will probably do the same with 2v2. Tbh, no one really cares about 2v2 cos its next to impossible to balance both 1v1 anf 2v2 at the same time. Plus team games are full if retards who think they are the shit when they cant even get gold in 1v1 |
| |
|
| dogabutila United States. February 18 2012 19:20. Posts 1436 | Profile Blog # |
On February 18 2012 19:16 Wilsonator wrote:
The bigger problem is siege'ing the back of the natural at the 7 o'clock. To respond the rocks have to be down, or you have to run all the way around to the right to defend. It gives a clear advantage depending on spawn locations
My friend and I just abused that earlier today. He had a few collo and obs, they moved ranged to the cliff to snipe the collo and then I popped up and fungaled everything. |
| | Baller Fanclub || CheAse Fanclub |
|
|
| Wilsonator February 18 2012 19:24. Posts 46 | Profile # |
On February 18 2012 19:20 dogabutila wrote:
My friend and I just abused that earlier today. He had a few collo and obs, they moved ranged to the cliff to snipe the collo and then I popped up and fungaled everything.
Exactly what I am talking about. I don't have a problem with the mechanic that a base that is so protected early is vulnerable, the problem is that the vulnerability is based on chance and spawn locations.
Also putting your units there to attack the back of the base is where you want your units anyway. It defends your main from counter-attacks unless they go the really long way around.Last edit: 2012-02-18 19:26:12 |
|
|
| Apom France. February 18 2012 19:46. Posts 553 | Profile # |
| Yes, Tyrador Keep is an interesting map, but it badly suffers from 3p rotational imbalance syndrome. |
| |
|
 Liquid`Snute Norway. February 18 2012 19:47. Posts 181 | Profile # |
Yes, this map is broken and should be banned from all nation wars, clan leagues and serious 2v2 tournaments. This is important for those of us that care. 2v2 haters, you are not contributing to this thread, stfu if you don't have anything useful to say.
A typical example of how broken this map could be is to take the bottom spawn vs the right spawn.
The right side team has nowhere logical to expand after 4 bases. Gold is unavailable because of siege from south's nat. South can expand safely to southwest gold with siege support from their natural and expand northwest if need be.
The expansion layouts are screwed and forces teams into retarded crap,
I hope tournament admins will realize how stupid this map is and ban it from nationwars and leagues that incorporate 2v2.
Blizz too, remove this map please t_t its way worse than tempest... |
|
|
 HaXXspetten Sweden. February 18 2012 20:33. Posts 15716 | Profile Blog # |
Yes, it has serious positional imbalances, and all-ins are also really powerful due to the ridiculously wide ramp with the rocks.
Just veto the map, it's terrible.
Other than that, just listen to what Snute said, pretty much sums it up. |
|
|
| Chr15t Denmark. February 18 2012 21:11. Posts 435 | Profile # |
On February 18 2012 19:13 Wilsonator wrote:
If they are going to make a game that includes 2v2 then they should keep it up-kept. Also I am looking for a little more that just veto it an move on, that is not very constructive. By that logic if a bad map is in 1v1 we should all just veto it and they should leave it in. People like to play with friends, therefore they should keep the experience great.
Well i play some 2v2 games on and off, and even though the game isnt balanced around 2v2 , is it too much to ask for at least decend symetrical maps? |
| | Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. |
|
|
| DaemonX February 19 2012 00:05. Posts 525 | Profile # |
On February 18 2012 19:47 Snute wrote:
Yes, this map is broken and should be banned from all nation wars, clan leagues and serious 2v2 tournaments. This is important for those of us that care. 2v2 haters, you are not contributing to this thread, stfu if you don't have anything useful to say.
A typical example of how broken this map could be is to take the bottom spawn vs the right spawn.
The right side team has nowhere logical to expand after 4 bases. Gold is unavailable because of siege from south's nat. South can expand safely to southwest gold with siege support from their natural and expand northwest if need be.
The expansion layouts are screwed and forces teams into retarded crap,
I hope tournament admins will realize how stupid this map is and ban it from nationwars and leagues that incorporate 2v2.
Blizz too, remove this map please t_t its way worse than tempest...
Respectfully, I disagree, Tyrador is my favourite map.
1) If someone is sieging the entrance to the south-east gold from the south nat, put heavy pressure on their secondary ramp or doom drop their in-base natural - since it's so far west of where you KNOW their siege army is you score guaranteed damage. If they get cute, ie spread too thin and don't commit enough to containment on that gold (trying to cover the west gold with siege, while covering their secondary ramp, and trying to contain the southeast gold all at the same time), you can just run in full force and crack their outside natural, due to the ridiculous lateral distance from in-base natural to the point they can siege the gold.
2) I LOVE when my opponents go tank-heavy on Tyrador. The vast openness and multiple base entrances make this an awful mech map. Tanks are far too slow to use effectively, and you can't even siege someone aggressively since they have two ramps. Sure if you play a standard comp, you will get crushed by tanks but this map gives you NO excuses for running standard compositions. Mobility rules here. Pure bio, MMM drop, blink stalker, warp prism, muta-ling, fast lair doom drops are all simply sick, sick on this map. Like, unstoppably good.
3) If you are playing mobility and they aren't, you're on a clock for a number of reasons, mainly: If their tank or colossus count hits critical mass you simply can't defend a contain on your 4th, and your targets for harassment dry up as they mine out. This is what throws off players in my experience. The solution is to go HARD on the harass FAST, especially if they spawned bottom. South spawn has horrid positioning issues, you MUST start to exploit this in the first ten minutes if you spawned right or you will die. But if you do so properly, there's fuck all South can respond with, since with mobile armies you can take any of the four northwest bases and when they try to crush you with a doomball army you just disengage and take out their main. If they try to base swap before they get more than 10-12 tanks you can easily catch them cross-map unsieged.
4) The first 2 expos are really safe. The 5th is very challenging to take - that's good design for a mobility 2s map. If you're playing it properly with mobility the game should tilt and collapse when or before the 5ths come online, as it's impossible for both teams to play mobility with hard aggression on a map this spread out and have noone fuck up eventually. Just because you can't turtle 8-base doomball 'macro' doesn't make it a bad map - it makes it a bad map for certain styles.
Tyrador Keep is to my mind the highest skill requiring 2v2 map in the rotation, or actually ever since the release of SC2. You need to control so much space, and actually THINK about positioning. It's really Brood War-y.Last edit: 2012-02-19 00:36:42 |
|
|
| Baum Germany. February 19 2012 00:35. Posts 955 | Profile # |
| While I don't really like this map it's still easily one of the better maps in the current pool because it's much easier to secure 4 bases than on most other maps. |
| | I want to be with those who share secret things or else alone. |
|
|
| skatbone United States. February 19 2012 04:13. Posts 926 | Profile # |
On February 18 2012 18:46 Wilsonator wrote:
Tyrador Keep in the 2v2 map pool seems to be the worst map in my opinion, and even is imbalanced depending on spawns in my opinion. The main reasons are:
-3rd expansion is impossible to secure since walk distances for defence are extremely long
-Siege tanks are far too effective when your ramp spawns near their in base natural
With the 3rd expansion being either the gold, getting a 3rd is extremely hard. The gold base is far to open in the back to be defended (and its a long walk to go defend). The 3rd base is such a long walk away there is no way to defend both your main your 3rd expo, unless you have a massive lead.
Siege tanks when your ramp is close to the in base natural of the opponent is unbelievable strong. With a banshee, overlord, observer, or even floating building you can shut down that expansion while defending your own main. Positioning your siege tanks there is not even inconvenient.
I know blizzard focuses on 1v1's but this map needs to be swapped in the 2v2 map pool, if anyone can explain to me why they like this map (other than being a terrain like myself and exploiting siege tanks) I would love to hear some opinions.
I agree. After playing on it for a month or two, I vetoed it as the spawning positions are imbalanced. If you spawn at the 9 and your opponent is at the 6, they have much greater access to the right side expos. I'd even argue that the 3 o'clock gold is easier for them to hold that the 11 o'clock would be for those who spawn at the 9. In these positions, the 3rd is vulnerable for the team that spawns at the 9 while it is easily defendable for those spawning at the 6.
If those spawning at the 6 break their rocks, the rush distance is Steppes of War short. Imo, this map heavily favors early pools and Terran early aggression. As a toss, I found it extremely frustrating to play on.
tl;dr Yes.
|
|
|
| phiinix United States. February 19 2012 04:29. Posts 1124 | Profile Blog # |
Why couldn't they have made it ACTUALLY symmetrical? x.x
The distances between left blue-gold, right blue-gold, and top blue-gold are crazy imbalanced, from short to mega long. |
|
|
| Berailfor February 19 2012 04:33. Posts 423 | Profile # |
| Yeah 2v2's really just aren't balanced properly anyway. I personally had a lot of fun playing tyrador keep it's a great map for fun tactics like nuking their base from the gold, scanning DT's into base from the gold, or blinking in from the gold and then mass recalling out after sniping 2 bases (personal favorite). So if you don't like it your best bet is to veto it. Unless you want to just abuse these so called imbalances yourself. |
|
|
| snively United States. February 19 2012 04:35. Posts 1080 | Profile Blog # |
On February 19 2012 04:13 skatbone wrote:
Show nested quote +On February 18 2012 18:46 Wilsonator wrote:
Tyrador Keep in the 2v2 map pool seems to be the worst map in my opinion, and even is imbalanced depending on spawns in my opinion. The main reasons are:
-3rd expansion is impossible to secure since walk distances for defence are extremely long
-Siege tanks are far too effective when your ramp spawns near their in base natural
With the 3rd expansion being either the gold, getting a 3rd is extremely hard. The gold base is far to open in the back to be defended (and its a long walk to go defend). The 3rd base is such a long walk away there is no way to defend both your main your 3rd expo, unless you have a massive lead.
Siege tanks when your ramp is close to the in base natural of the opponent is unbelievable strong. With a banshee, overlord, observer, or even floating building you can shut down that expansion while defending your own main. Positioning your siege tanks there is not even inconvenient.
I know blizzard focuses on 1v1's but this map needs to be swapped in the 2v2 map pool, if anyone can explain to me why they like this map (other than being a terrain like myself and exploiting siege tanks) I would love to hear some opinions.
I agree. After playing on it for a month or two, I vetoed it as the spawning positions are imbalanced. If you spawn at the 9 and your opponent is at the 6, they have much greater access to the right side expos. I'd even argue that the 3 o'clock gold is easier for them to hold that the 11 o'clock would be for those who spawn at the 9. In these positions, the 3rd is vulnerable for the team that spawns at the 9 while it is easily defendable for those spawning at the 6. If those spawning at the 6 break their rocks, the rush distance is Steppes of War short. Imo, this map heavily favors early pools and Terran early aggression. As a toss, I found it extremely frustrating to play on. tl;dr Yes.
lol steppes of war. who even remembers steps of war any more? xD
but I'm sure tyrador keep will be phased out as blizzard works on the map pools.
...eventually |
| |
|
| VashTS United States. February 19 2012 06:15. Posts 1537 | Profile # |
| Agreed, it's a horrible map. |
| | VashTS; 330; Random -- Ranked #9 Pokemon Video Game Player in the World in 2009 |
|
|
| zaradron Canada. February 19 2012 08:10. Posts 15 | Profile # |
| Just veto it. Blizzard is primarily focussing on balancing 1v1 to its full potential, and in order to do that, 2s, 3s, and 4s suffer because it would be impossible to keep 1v1 balanced with all the random OP strats in team games that would be nerfed if they wanted to have team games competitively balanced. |
|
|
| 1 2 3 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
