| Back to "beta" maps. Show all maps. Last update for (2)Grudge : 2008, 11, 08 00:30
mapID | Mapname (comments) | map size | Author | Rating | Type | play type | 3327 | (2)Grudge | 128*128 | Dem0nS1ayer | 2.4 | beta | ground | The map has been rated 8 times and got a total of 19 points | <<>> You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
Dem0nS1ayer | | | I'm using this map for a mapping contest on sc2gg.com. This version IS NOT final, and the deco/doodads aren't done. | NastyMarine | | | your not supposed to upload your submission publicly for the competition | Dem0nS1ayer | | | What...? This map isn't for the contest on this site. It's for another contest on SC2GG.COM. I know that I can post a map for that contest anywhere I like... | illisid | | | chickenlords contest is somewhere else | JungleTerrain | | | why is there a neutral building blocking the gas expoes at the 12 and the 6, when they are already extremely far away from the both players?
The minonly looks like it has too much money
Looks like no one will use the sides until 20 minutes into the game, imo
The nat will be too hard vs muta harrass.
Map looks pretty boring to me :P | Dem0nS1ayer | | | I put the buildings there so that terran couldn't just lift their CC and place it there, since it's right behind the nat. As for the nat, I keep meaning to make space for turrets, but I forgot. D:
Updated the map with more space in nat for turrets and make the min only expos 7 minerals. | NastyMarine | | | I guess I was thinking about another competition thats going on right now my bad. | JungleTerrain | | | "I put the buildings there so that terran couldn't just lift their CC and place it there, since it's right behind the nat."
Well, if you did expand there, then since it is so far away from you and it will be vulnerable to attack, then it will probably get spotted, it gets attacked, you lose 400 minerals and probably let your opponent get a huge advantage. If you haven't noticed, its farther away from the "owner's" nat than the "enemy's" nat.
Also, i don't see any changes. :( Did you forget to upload the picture? The map is protected. modified by JungleTerrain | Dem0nS1ayer | | | Oh yeah I didn't put up another picture yet. :O Sorry about it being protected... My Scmdraft is fucking possessed and protects maps! D:
And how are those expos farther away from the mains that are right next to them? To get to the enemies expo, you'd have to go all the way across the map. To get to the expo behind your nat, you'd just have to lift a cc and it would take like 30 seconds to get there. >.>
I also decided to keep the third expo 9 minerals. I like that better than 7. So basically, the only change I've done so far is making some room behind minerals in nat for turrets. | JungleTerrain | | | i was talking about the time your army takes to actually get to the expo, not the time the cc takes to get there. Imo, that expo should be moved closer to both players, in army distances. The map looks way too big, ever thought of remaking it in a smaller size, like BlueStorm size? or Chupung Ryeong size?
What would be the point of putting down a cc in a place you can't defend? For Example, if you are Red, then you would have to send your troops to the top right of the map to defend it. Then you would have a bad positioned army, and then you'd get owned. Although the example is kind of extreme, it makes sense.
Also, the minonly, or how you call it, the "third expansion", will make ZvT and ZvP imbalanced. The terran and protoss macro will be too good, since they will be mining around 25 mineral patches in total. The zerg needs their third gas, which seems terribly hard to hold on this map. The terran/protoss will be able to outmacro the zerg really easily. You need to know that the zerg needs alot of gas lategame. |
| Replays
Upload replay for this map |
Add your comment:
Because of heavy spam on the map comments, it is needed to be logged in to post. We are sorry that this has to be done because nothing else stops spam bots
| |