I was thinking about how most map makers now-a-days are leaning towards more micro in their maps, and it got me thinking.
We all know many people complain about PvZ; how its so imba. But I realized that since Z is such a mobile race that it can really set the pace of a PvZ early and fast... We all know that we are still in this 'Macro Map Era' so to speak (which ultimately helps Z in this match up) .. So since we are leaning toward micro maps now, will it now favor P more? And to clarify micro maps and macro maps, could someone explain the differences between them for some of us.. cause most of us have a basic idea but not all of us... I for one lack superior knowledge to always distiguish from them and to explain it to others.
well consider lost temple and requiem, they have unique features that make it open for many manuevers, unlike luna, where a straigh-forward play is meant for such a straight-forward map. Lost temple has countless combinations, expo placement, and unpredictability. Requiem is a bit less but still greatly varied, with that nice use of that semi-island background and the 6 mineral nat with only 1000 mineral apiece, it turns for a great intensive game.
IMO, a great map is P = T T = Z and slightly P > Z
well, macro is stressed due to many factors. true, as lnept said, the number of expos is important. but there are many other features:
-easy naturals are EARLY naturals (maybe even FE in PvZ, ifac CC in TvP) which leads to a fast pumping state in gameplay
-accessability of additional expansions - minonly AND other gas expos. two gas-min-islands (on a groundmap) next to each base would turn into macro n mass.
-number of minblocks (more influence than you'd think). the key to this is only partly the more ressources, the real part of it is that you mine much faster, and then nowadays you can start massing earlier. having 9/8 is definetly running several gates more than 6/6.
-distances between naturals/bases. long distances always make expanding to the natural or other close expansions safer. short distances on the other hand favor rush builds (so no peon-pumping and powering happens in early game)
-"duration" of an expansion. that was shown on jungle_raid. less minblocks, but more ressources (2000 or 2500), in main were slowing down the game in the beginning. but at the same time, later on, when normally your main is empty, you still DID have an additional income from it.
-mainbases. the larger they are, and the more comfortable, the more gateways/factories can be layed down there. this enables many buildings (logically), and it also has another macro advantage: all training builds are on one spot. the experience shows that you keep pumping and massing more effectively and constantly, if you dont have your buildings spread all over the map, but close together
-position of the mainbases. many maps today dont make a drop appealing. sure, they happen anyway, but maps that _favor_ drop or muta harass clearly lead to more micro scenarios. trench warfare for example gave me many games with rvr drop, muta harass, vult drop, guards etc. the exposed ecolines favored a micro-gamestyle
-4player maps are always leaning towards more macro, because the unused bases (in 1on1) really call for an expo - as mainbases always have a nice neat choke(point), you can nicely defend there. neutral expos on 2player maps are almost always not as easy to close.
i may have missed some other thing, but i guess i named all important aspects