The Year in StarCraft II 2011 PDF

8/2/2019 The Year in StarCraft II 2011 PDF

1/303


2/303


3/303

The Year in StarCraft II: 2011

by Robert C. Ring

Double Forge PublishingBirmingham, AL


4/303

Copyright 2012 Robert C. Ring. All Rights Reserved.

Published by Double Forge Publishing

www.doubleforgepublishing.com

Co-edited by Shawn Sheth SimonCover design by Garrett Weinzierl

This publication is not endorsed or licensed by BlizzardEntertainment.

ISBN: 978-0-9851458-0-4Library of Congress Control Number 2012932373

Printing/manufacturing information on back page.


5/303

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 5

CH. 1: THE LANDSCAPE OF THE GAME ............................... 7

PATCHES ............................................................................ 7

LADDER MAPS .................................................................. 16

TOURNAMENT MAPS .......................................................... 22

CH. 2: STRATEGIES AND METAGAME .............................. 28

PROTOSS.......................................................................... 28

TERRAN ........................................................................... 38

ZERG............................................................................... 44

CH. 3: THE DEFINING PLAYERS ........................................ 51

CH. 4: THE MAJOR LEAGUES ......................................... 123

APPENDIX A: PLAYER RECORDS .................................... 136

APPENDIX B: STATISTICS ............................................... 279

INDEX ........................................................................... 289


6/303

To Lindsey and Kathryn

Acknowledgments

Thanks first and foremost to Blizzard Entertainment for making

StarCraft II. Few other developers could have made a game that is atonce so finely tuned and so dynamic. Thanks also to the players,teams, leagues, casters, websites, podcasts, and fans of this great gamefor helping to make it one of the most fun and exciting forms ofprofessional competition in the world.

Thanks to Reddits r/StarCraft, which has provided overwhelmingsupport, enthusiasm, and feedback for this project and, in doing so,directly helped fashion it into its final form. Thanks to HughHoney

and Michael Tomservo Kontrovitz in particular, whose input wasespecially formative, and to Primadog, who provided both ideas andcontacts that were essential for its completion.

A very special thank you to my fact-checker and second opinionShawn Sheth Simon, for believing in and helping to refine this book,and thanks to my friend Garrett Saint Weinzierl for designing acover with which I could not be happier.

Thank you to my wife Lindsey and daughter Kathryn, who

unquestioningly put up with my many late nights, early mornings, andlong Saturdays of writing and watching VOD after VOD.

Finally, thanks to the reader for buying this book. I firmly believein the value of recording and telling the history of this esport as ithappens, and you are directly supporting that cause. Without you, TheYear in StarCraft IIwould be nothing.

About the Author

Robert Ring, also known as KingOctavious in the StarCraft world,is a writer, StarCraft II enthusiast, Zerg player, and sci-fi film expertfrom Birmingham, Alabama. He is the author ofSci-Fi Movie Freak, a

web content developer for competitive gaming team Evil Geniuses,and the creator of the film review website The Sci-Fi Block. He hasalso contributed to the StarCast podcast and the Good Game esportsdocumentary. In his spare time, Robert consumes ill-advised

quantities of literature ranging from comics to poetry, plays an equallyunadvisable amount of StarCraft II, and teaches his daughter how to beat two-base all-ins. Feel free to follow him on Twitter attwitter.com/KingOctavious or, for his real-life stuff, twitter.com/Robert_Ring, and ifyou see him on the ladder, dont forget to say Hi.


7/303


8/303

Introduction

In 2011, North America saw a phenomenal surge in interest in

professional gaming. While the professional gaming scene had beenestablished and had even been developing for some time, this was the

year it took off, and the explosion in popularity was led primarily byone gameStarCraft II: Wings of Liberty. StarCraft IIs predecessor,the first StarCraft and its Brood Warexpansion, had been popular inSouth Korea for much of the preceding decade, but, outside of thatcountry, the game as a form of professional competition remained atightly woven niche. Of course, StarCraft II was released in July of

2010 and had been in beta for several months preceding that, but itwasnt until 2011 that its Western popularity began to truly blossom.We see this in record numbers of tournament stream viewers as wellas in the creation of two new major global leagues centered in North

Americathe IGN Pro League and the North American Star League.As an avid StarCraft II fan, I found myself wanting two things that

had not yet been produced in the midst of this growth: a work devotedto the most prominent players, happenings, and developments within

the StarCraft community, and a convenient way to keep up withplayers annual stats across the major leagues. There are a number ofgreat StarCraft resources out there, but none, I believe, are exactly likethis. For that reason, I decided to make one.

The Year in StarCraft IIis designed to be an annual chronicle ofthe professional StarCraft II scene, focusing primarily on the evolutionof the game itself, the strategies developed within the game, theindividuals who play the game on a professional level, and the most

prominent leagues hosting competitive StarCraft II. My aim is for the book to serve as a record oftop players struggles and triumphs, adocument of the many things that make professional StarCraft II sucha dynamic sport, and a reference for the way all aspects of the esportplay out during the year.

Before we get into it, however, a quick word on language, spelling,and audience. This book is written for fans (whether casual orhardcore) of StarCraft II. As such, it makes prevalent use of commonStarCraft II terminology which, though understandable by anyonefamiliar with the game, will not be as readily understood by those whohave never played it. While I have generally, for claritys sake, tried toavoid abbreviations such as Hatch, Rax, or Ling, youll see nohesitation or overlong explanation when using common StarCraftterminology. I assume, for instance, that everyone reading this book


9/303

6 The Year in StarCraft II: 2011

will understand terms like micro,splash damage, and cheese inthe context of the game. In keeping with the common languageestablished by the developers and community, The Year in StarCraft

II also preserves the frequently cosmetic capitalization of players

names, such as KiWiKaKi, DIMAGA, and asd. In the case of afew players, name capitalization varied during the year. In these casesI have attempted to use the form most common or most prominentlyused by the player.

Finally, there is one particular word in this book that I havewritten in a way that differs from its common form. That is the wordesports. In virtually any other related writing, the term is writteneither e-sports or eSports, with the rare form E-sports cropping

up from time to time. While theres nothing wrong with any of thesemethods of presenting the word, I feel that eventually we will migratetoward the simple esports. Just as we have gone from e-mail toemail over the years, thus we will eventually find a level offamiliarity with the term for our sport such that it becomes a commonsingle word rather than a novel combination of two terms, electronicand sports. Thus, while it makes no significant difference, Ive optedto use esports in order to present the word as a common term,

rather than a not entirely familiar one, insofar as it is used within thecompetitive gaming culture.With that out of the way, I truly hope that you will enjoy this book

and that it will enhance your appreciation of StarCraft II and theculture surrounding it. As fans of this game, we are extremely lucky.

We get to witness this great sport mature into its fully developed form. We get to be the ones who watched NesTea become the first tochampion a GSL season without losing a single game. We chatted withplayers like TLO and iNcontroL at Major League Gamingtournaments. We saw MMA rise from the level of moderate Code Aplayer to master of the game. The Year in StarCraft IIis an attempt tocapture these stories that make the esport what it is. This, I hope, will

be the book it deserves.


10/303

Ch. 1The Landscape of the Game

As anyone familiar with real-time strategy games would expect,StarCraft II was not perfectly understood or, therefore, balanced whenit was released in 2010. Though the community and developers had

half a year before 2011 to identify problems and imbalances, there would still be plenty of issues to correct in 2011 and beyond. Thischapter, The Landscape of the Game, discusses the way the gameitselfas opposed to strategies within the gamewas adjusted to theplayers evolving understanding of both general StarCraft II strategyand specific dynamics among the three races. This discussion isfocused on balance patches that directly affect units and the way thegame works as well as map design and map pools, which affect the

types of advantages (or lack thereof) that races may have in eachmatchup in both professional and ladder play. Though professionalplay is, of course, the focus of this book, ladder map discussion isincluded here, as those maps comprise a significant portion ofprofessional practice and simultaneously reflect the developersunderstanding of the game as a whole.

Patches

During the early part of 2011, a large number of BlizzardsStarCraft II patches were aimed at making Protoss a more dynamicrace. One of the races most pervading issues was the fact that the PvPmatchup had become extremely reliant upon the four-Gate build(constructing four Warp Gates, cutting Probe production, and

attacking the other player with a constant stream of Zealots andStalkers warped in via a Pylon built near their base). While there wasobviously not an issue of balance involved in the mirror matchup, thenear necessity of opting for a four-Gate every time in PvP made thematchup a dull one. The developers also made tweaks to the race inorder to address the difficulty that players (especially Zerg players)


11/303


faced when contending with the Protoss death ballan armycomposition consisting of many Stalkers, a handful of Colossi, a fewSentries, and occasionally miscellaneous other units. Finally, Blizzardmade some adjustments to Protoss simply to encourage the use of

seldom-used units, such as the Archon, Warp Prism, and Mothership.Imbalanced or not, Protoss received heavy treatment in a number of

ways from Blizzard throughout the year.Similar issues were addressed for Terran and Zerg. Ghosts and

Infestors saw their utility rise significantly in 2011 (and later, in eachcase, saw their power throttled back a bit). Alterations involving thelengthening of various Terran building and research times, likeBunkers and the Stimpack upgrade, and the improvement of some

Zerg elements, including the reduction of both Ultralisk productiontime and Spore Crawler root time, were examples of Patches thoseraces received. Though Protoss saw the most adjustments, all threeraces experienced a number of tweaks

In typical Blizzard fashion, the most common adjustments madeto weaken (nerf) or strengthen (buff) various builds orcompositions rarely involved directly altering units hit points ordamage output. In the case of the four-Gate, for instance, changes

related to ramp vision and the Immortals attack range were whatultimately broke the necessity of the build. To combat the power of ahigh-tier, late-game Protoss army, the High Templars Khaydarin

Amulet upgrade (which increased the units starting energy) wasremoved from the game. Blizzard generally also kept such alterationsmild to moderate in nature, though the Warp Prism shield buff was anotable exception, as the unit was given sixty extra shield points tomake it a more prevalent unit in Protoss play.

Finally, by the end of the year, there were two units that thedevelopers seemed to have given up on. Those were the Mothershipand the Carrier. The Mothership received a slight acceleration boost inPatch 1.4.0 and saw some creative and effective use during the year,

but it remained a seldom-used unit despite its arguable utility. TheCarrier, on the other hand, received no treatment from Blizzard

whatsoever and was seen even more rarely than the Mothership.Because of the general nonuse of these two units, Blizzard announcedat BlizzCon in October that they would both likely be removed fromthe game in the Heart of the Swarm expansion.

Patch 1.2.0 (January 11)

Master league introduced Customizable hotkeys added


12/303

The Landscape of the Game 9

Stalemate detection introduced Harvester count displayed on Vespene Geyser info panel Ramp-blocking with two 2x2 structures no longer possible

Protoss Hallucination research time decrease: 100 to 80 Observer cost decrease: 50/100 to 25/75 Phoenix build time decrease: 45 to35 Void Ray now deals 20% bonus damage to Massive units Void Rays Flux Vanes speed upgrade removed

Terran

SCVs repairing other units now take on same threat priority asunit being repaired

SCV construction movement patterns are more consistentOne ofPatch 1.2.0s most notable changes was the introduction of

the Master league, distinguishing players in the top two percent ofeach region. Previously, Diamond was the highest league, spanning allplayers in the top twenty percent of each regions ladder, a much more

inclusive pool than Master. In terms of balance, the most significantchange in this patch may have been Blizzard making it impossible to

block ramps with two 2x2 structures. Previously, such tactics wereoccasionally used against Zerg players in order to keep them fromexpanding in the early game. If the other player was successful in

blocking the Zergs ramp in this manner, especially if the 2x2structures used were Bunkers with Marines in them, there was rarely a

viable alternative strategy to which the Zerg could turn.

Interestingly, despite a widespread, albeit far from unanimous,sentiment that Protoss was a slightly overpowered race at this point,nearly all of Blizzards Protoss adjustments made that races unitsmore viable and powerful. The exception to this was the removal ofthe Void Rays Flux Vanes speed upgrade, which had previously madethe unit incredibly powerful, especially in the early game and in largenumbers. Despite the races overall power level, most of these changesmade sense. Observers became a more reasonable means of acquiring

map vision, and it became more plausible to build up the number ofPhoenixes necessary to be effective. Overall, the patch worked tobalance the Protoss unit composition in and of itself, delaying cross-race balances in order to allow various cross-race dynamics to matureon their own before doing so.


13/303


Patch 1.3.0 (March 22)

Grandmaster league introduced to 1v1 ladder Loss counts removed from profile displays for all players except

those in the Grandmaster league Close patrol points dont hide unit numbers as effectively

Protoss

Units caught in the Motherships Vortex are invulnerable for 1.5seconds upon leaving Vortex

High Templar Khaydarin Amulet starting energy upgrade removed Charging Zealots guaranteed to land at least one hit on fleeing

targets

Terran

Battlecruiser movement speed increase: 1.406 to 1.875 Bunker construction time increase: 30 to 40 Ghost EMP drains a max of 100 energy from targeted unit (no

change to Protoss shield effect) Stimpack research time increase: 140 to 170

Zerg

Infestor Fungal Growth effect duration decrease: 8 to 4 Infestor Fungal Growth damage increase: +30% against Armored

units

Many of the changes made in Patch 1.3.0 were aimed at makingZerg more viable against Protoss. With Protoss, two of the races mostpowerful elements were removed: the Khaydarin Amulet upgrade, andthe ability to perform a technique dubbed by players as the ArchonToilet. This is the term the community gave to the technique ofmaking several Archons along with a Mothership, then casting Vortexon the opponents army, and moving the Archons in to deal splashdamage to the entire army upon their exiting the Vortex, at whichpoint all Vortexed units are stacked on a small area. Doing so couldliterally annihilate an entire army in a matter of seconds while theProtoss took little damage (or risk). With the brief post-Vortex period

of invulnerability granted by this patch, these units gained theopportunity to spread out before suffering mass splash damage from

Archons or other units. With the Khaydarin Amulet, which boostedthe starting energy of High Templar, those units could be warped in

with the immediate ability to cast Psionic Storm. Blizzard decided


14/303


that, especially when the High Templar were combined with Colossi,this ability to so quickly and easily deal large amounts of splashdamage simply made the race too powerful. It should also be notedthat in their discussion of this change, Blizzard hinted at nerfing the

Colossus at a future time, though no such nerf was implementedduring 2011.

For Zerg, the Infestors Fungal Growth duration decrease wasactually a buff to the ability, as it caused the abilitys damage to beinflicted faster, over a shorter period of time. The damage increaseagainst Armored units made this duration decrease especiallyeffective. With the Infestor able to inflict higher amounts of damage,these easily killed, expensive units became significantly more cost

effective and offered Zerg armies an additional tool for dealing withthe Protoss death ball. Outside of ZvP, Zerg received additional benefits from this patch, as the Terran Bunker construction timeincrease was aimed primarily at making it easier for Zerg players tohold off Bunker rushes, a common technique used to take out theraces necessary early Hatcheries.

Terran was affected by this patch in other matchups as well.Stimpack research was lengthened to weaken the power of early Stim

timing attacks, which almost had to be specifically prepared for inorder to defend (especially if the Terran player built a fast threeBarracks). The Ghosts EMP nerf was introduced simply to allowcasting units a fighting chance to compete with the armies of skilledTerran players. Additionally, the implemented inability of all races tohide air unit numbers with patrol points was aimed primarily atTerran. This was an exploit commonly performed with Vikings(primarily in TvT), as indefinite numbers of the unit could be stackedroughly on the space of one Viking by forcing the units to patrol two

very close points. Finally, the Battlecruisers speed was increased sothat the unit could be used relatively more often in high-level play, asit was almost unheard of in higher leagues and professionaltournaments.

Patch 1.3.3 (May 10)

Protoss

Archon upgraded to Massive Archon attack range increase: 2 to 3 Warp Gate research time increase: 140 to 160 Sentry build time decrease: 42 to 37 Pylon power radius decrease: 7.5 to 6.5


15/303


Terran

Bunker Salvage refund reduction: 100% to 75% Ghost cost change: 150/150 to 200/100 Thor 250mm Strike Cannon now an energy-based ability (costs

150 energy), changed from cooldown Thor starts with 50 energy and has max 200 energy

Zerg

Infestor speed decrease: 2.5 to 2.25 Spore Crawler root time decrease: 12 to 6

Patch 1.3.3 introduced a number of mild to moderate changes,primarily to add to the dynamic of Terran and Protoss strategy. The

Archons range increase was implemented to make the previouslyseldom-used unit become more useful in various situations. Thisalteration was successful, as the Archon indeed became morefrequently used after the patch without reaching the point at whichplayers could mindlessly mass the unit. The other Protoss changes

Warp Gate research time increase, Sentry production time decrease,and Pylon power radius decrease were a combined attempt to cut

down on the ubiquity of the four-Gate, which was dominating PvP andcreating a stagnancy in that matchup. Unfortunately, these changesdid little to cut down on the prevalence of the build. Instead, the four-Gate became simply delayed (due to the increased Warp Gate researchtime).

For Terran, the Thors changes were a nerf to the unit, which mayhave been slightly too powerful with the 250mm Strike Cannon in itsprevious form. Turning this into a high-energy ability instead of a

cooldown ability made the 250mm Strike Cannon take much longer touse after making the unit. Additionally, as the Thor in turn became anenergy unit, it was susceptible to Feedbacks from High Templar. Afterthese changes were implemented, the 250mm Strike Cannon abilityall but vanished from play. The Ghosts decreased gas cost andincreased mineral cost, on the other hand, was a direct buff. As gas is amuch scarcer resource than minerals in the game, this allowed players

both to add more Ghosts to their armies and to have better non-Ghost

support (in the form of other gas-costly units) for those armies.Finally, Infestor speed was reduced, perhaps counterintuitively,for the benefit of Zerg players. The unit was previously known forracing ahead of other units in its control group, being the first to reachthe enemy and getting killed almost immediately. With the speed


16/303


decrease, they could still keep up with the rest of the army but wouldtend to stay safely behind other units.

Patch 1.4.0 (September 20)

Vision up ramps reduced by 1 Resources received from Salvaging or canceling structures now

pop up on-screen at the location of the Salvage/cancel

Protoss

Immortal attack range increase: 5 to 6 Mothership acceleration increase: 0.3 to 1.375 Units are now added to Motherships Cloaking Field at a rate of 25

per second, instead of all instantaneously (to reduce lag) Blink research duration increase: 110 to 140 Warp Prism shields increase: 40 to 100 Units can no longer be warped in on ramps, regardless of ramp

vision (note: this change not listed in Blizzards patch notes)

Terran

Barracks construction time increase: 55 to 60 Hellions Infernal Pre-igniter damage upgrade reduction: +10 to

+5 Ravens Seeker Missile movement speed increase: 2.5 to 2.953

Zerg

Infestors Fungal Growth damage reduction: 36 (+30% againstArmored units) to 30 (40 against Armored units)

Infestors Neural Parasite range decrease: 9 to 7 Overseer cost decrease: 50/100 to 50/50 Overseers Contaminate energy cost increase: 75 to 125 Ultralisk build time decrease: 70 to 55

There was significant outrage from Zerg players over patch 1.4.0.Initially, one of the changes planned for this patch was to make allMassive units immune to the Infestors Neural Parasite. Thecommunity was almost unanimously opposed to this change, as there

are few non-Massive units on which it makes sense to use NeuralParasite in the first place. Additionally, this nerf would have madesimplistic massing strategies, such as mass Thor, much more viableand likely overpowered against Zerg.

After receiving largely negative feedback from the community,Blizzard opted not to make Massive units immune to Neural Parasite


17/303


but instead made the still-controversial move of significantly reducingthe abilitys range. Many Zerg players argued that this effectivelymade Neural Parasite a useless ability, as the new range meant theInfestor would have to be well within firing range of most units that

Neural Parasite is useful againstunits which are able to kill Infestorsquickly. Blizzards reasoning, on the other hand, was that they wantedto promote the need to maneuver Infestors to a flanking position inorder to use such a powerful spell, rather than simply clumping them

behind an army and using them to freely take control of enemy units.Though the harassment technique of using Medivacs to drop

Hellions with the Infernal Pre-igniter upgrade (more commonlyknown as Blue-flame Hellions) on enemy worker lines had been

popular for some time, its use had begun to explode in the monthspreceding this patch. With the combination of Hellions cheap cost,line splash attack range, and bonus damage against Light units,Terran players could easily use a handful of the units to inflict near-instant crippling economic damage on their opponents. Blizzardsreduction of the attack bonus provided by the Infernal Pre-igniterupgrade gave players more time to respond to Blue Flame Hellionharassment before losing large numbers of workers.

The ramp vision, ramp warping, Blink research, and Immortalrange changes were primarily aimed at the continuing necessity ofplayers to use the four-Gate in PvP. The ramp vision tweak wascrucial. Not only did it allow players to more easily play defensively,

but it also became significantly more difficult for aggressiveopponents to jump Blink Stalkers onto the high ground and to then

warp in units on the high ground with a nearby Pylon (as the playermust have vision of the high ground before doing so). The inability to

warp units directly onto a ramp also furthered this cause, as doing socould previously provide better vision up a ramp in order to Blink intothe main base or simply attack defending units. Because of thesechanges along with the increased range given to the Immortal, it

became much easier to defend ramps in PvP and thus hold off four-Gates. In the end, this patch was indeed successful in mitigating theeffectiveness of the four-Gate (though it was still necessary on mapslike TalDarim Altar, which have no ramp leading to the main base),and PvP became more dynamic as a result.

Patch 1.4.2 (November 8)

Protoss

Ground weapon upgrade level 2 cost decrease: 175/175 to 150/150


18/303


Ground weapon upgrade level 3 cost decrease: 250/250 to200/200

Ground armor upgrade level 2 cost decrease: 175/175 to 150/150 Ground armor upgrade level 3 cost decrease: 250/250 to 200/200 Shield upgrade level 1 cost decrease: 200/200 to 150/150 Shield upgrade level 2 cost decrease: 300/300 to 225/225 Shield upgrade level 3 cost decrease: 400/400 to 300/300

Terran

Ghosts EMP radius decrease: 2 to 1.5Patch 1.4.2 was one of the simpler and more straightforward

patches of the year, and the only aspect of it that most StarCraft IIplayers found important was the Ghosts EMP radius decrease. Oncethe Ghosts gas cost was decreased in Patch 1.3.3, Terrans began usingthe unit more frequently and eventually realized how devastating afew well-cast EMPs (removing 100 shield points from every unitcaught in the spells radius) could be to a Protoss army. Though HighTemplar can render Ghosts useless, it is significantly more difficult tofind and target individual ghosts with Feedback than it is to blanket an

army with the area-of-effect EMP. EMP eventually became viewed bymany players as overpowered, thus Blizzard decreased the abilitysradius, and the Ghost resultantly found a more balanced role in TvP,though some argued that the 1.5 radius was too low and that a radiussomewhere between 1.5 and 2 would be more reasonable.

Most of the StarCraft II community viewed the Protoss upgradecost decreases as coming from nowhere. It was neither a buff thatProtoss players had been asking for, nor was it one that players of any

race felt strongly about after it was implemented. Though there werearguments to be had both for and against the cost decrease, there werefew if any obvious effects on Protoss strategy or performance resultingfrom the buff.

While Blizzard was criticized at times for being slow to addresscertain issues and at other times for implementing changes toohastily, there is no doubt that StarCraft II was a far more balanced

game at the end of 2011 than at the beginning. Still, no onesunderstanding of the game could be considered perfect by the end ofthe year, and the developers themselves were no exception. WithProtoss players suffering somewhat in high-tier professional play,

builds like Terrans 1/1/1 against Protoss popping up and seeming toguarantee victory, and, most importantly, the release of the Heart of


19/303


the Swarm expansion coming at an unknown point in the future, there would be plenty of changes for the game to undergo in upcomingyears.

Ladder Maps

2011saw a number of adjustments to StarCraft IIs map pool. Thetrend throughout the year, not only on the ladder but in professionalleagues as well, was a movement toward maps of larger size. Playersand developers quickly realized that not only are bigger maps

generally more balanced than the smaller ones that marked StarCraftIIs debut, but they also lead to games that are more fun to play and watch. Though the leagues were almost categorically better thanBlizzard at incorporating such maps into their pools, Blizzardgenerally followed suit in providing maps that better accommodatethe type of play that is best for the growth and enjoyment of the game.

Season 1

Map Pool:Blistering SandsJungle BasinLost TempleMetalopolisScrap StationSteppes of WarXelNaga Caverns

Season 1 had what must be considered the worst map pool of themall. This is not so much the fault of the developers themselves but ofthe fact that the game had yet to be played and observed on a

widespread level. It was simply difficult to determine the proper scalefor maps to reach before they could be considered balanced. Steppesof War and Blistering Sands were the maps that players despised themost, as both were short-distance two-player maps, heavily favoring

all-ins such as six-Pools or even Drone rushes by Zerg players. On theother hand, Siege Tank contains were also easily accomplished onthese maps, making it difficult for Zerg players to expand in the earlygamesomething that is crucial for standard Zerg play. Other maps

were considered imbalanced not because of size but because of layoutand terrain. Jungle Basin is an example of how layout can cripple a


20/303


maps playability, as that map has third bases that are nearlyimpossible to hold and back-door destructible rocks that make basicdefense a nightmare. Lost Temple was removed for similar reasons, asit almost guarantees victory to Terran players who drop Siege Tanks

on an otherwise unreachable high ground walling opponents naturalexpansions. The first season of the StarCraft II ladder was not acomplete loss, but it strongly demonstrated that the game had a long

way to evolve before it was fully understood from a mapmakingperspective.

Season 2

Map Pool:Backwater GulchDelta QuadrantMetalopolisScrap StationSlag PitsShakuras PlateauThe Shattered Temple

TalDarim Altar LETyphon PeaksXelNaga Caverns

Beginning with Season 2, Blizzard introduced mostly larger mapsto the ladder pool. Due likely to the heritage of Lost Temple maps inBlizzard games, the developer replaced the problematic Lost Temple

with a similar map called The Shattered Temple, which remained in

the map pool (and some tournaments) even beyond 2011. This mapslayout is almost the same as its predecessors, but it is significantlylarger and the doomsday high grounds have been removed.Furthermore, Lost Temples Terran-favored island expansions arereplaced in The Shattered Temple by destructible rock expansions.These minor alterations cause the slow-moving, often stationaryTerran armies to face a slight disadvantage against Zerg in particular,as they are forced to cross a wide-open center when attacking head-onand thus are vulnerable to flank attacks from every angle. However,this particular disadvantage in TvZ is counterbalanced by severalelements, including the chokes leading from natural expansions,

which favor Siege Tank contains and defense; the large starting areas,which allow for easier Medivac drop harassment; and the difficult-to-secure third bases, which are a hindrance to Zerg macro.


21/303


Other welcome additions in Season 2 were Shakuras Plateau andTalDarim Altar (the only independently developed map incorporatedinto Blizzards ladder pool), both of which also remained in the mappool through the rest of the year. Though it at first featured

destructible rocks at the main bases, making midgame attackdistances incredibly short for some starting positions, ShakurasPlateau came to be considerably well balanced after the destructiblerocks were removed from the main bases and placed at the maps last-effort expansions. On Shakuras Plateau in its final form, early-gameexpansions are easy to secure, as they are accessed from outside by asecond (albeit wide) ramp, and third bases are relatively easy toestablish, though slightly more difficult to defend. While there are two

open areas on this map, there are also a number of chokes, includingtwo near the middle of the map, as well as high brush that blocksvision when crossing the map. These elements, coupled with the factthat Shakuras Plateau is a mid-sized map, make XelNaga Watchtowercontrol especially important. The relative ease of establishingexpansions as well as the presence of layout dynamics that forceplayers to choose favorable areas to engage (based on race and playstyle) allowed Shakuras Plateau to remain an accepted map on the

ladder as well as one that multiple leagues picked up for tournamentplay.TalDarim Altar turned out to be one of the best maps on the

ladder. Not only was it by far the largest of the ladders 1v1 maps, butits layout is particularly well balanced and, compared to the othermaps in the pool, unique. The size of TalDarim Altar is balanced by aneed to respect the potential for early pressure, as it was the onlyladder map with no ramps leading to any of the starting positions orexpansions (save for one wide ramp leading to the area outside thenatural expansion). This allows for the possibility of players to catchothers off-guard with early pressure and all-ins, and, for better or

worse, it also accounts for the fact that it remained the only viablemap for the traditional four-Gate to be executed in PvP after Patch1.4.0 (since that patchs impedance of the four-Gate largely hinged onenhancing defensive capabilities at the ramp). Further forcing playersto play actively and carefully despite the maps size, the third andfourth bases, though relatively close in proximity to the naturalexpansions, each have entrances at difficult-to-reinforce traveldistances, thus further forcing players to actively scout for incomingpressure. While the middle of the map is open, the presence of fourXelNaga Watchtowers as well as several high-ground areas means


22/303


that players still have to pay close attention to army positioning withrespect to the terrain when moving out.

Despite the general improvements, however, there were a numberof maps introduced at this point that were largely derided by the

community. Two of the most widely disliked were Delta Quadrant andSlag Pits. Delta Quadrant features two natural expansions: one safelytucked away behind the main base and one left wide open to themiddle of the map. However, the expansion behind the main base is

blocked by destructible debris, meaning that Zerg players, whoessentially have to take early expansions against non-Zerg players, areforced to expand to the easily harassed base while their opponents canmore easily take the back expansion. Slag Pits, despite having four

starting points, is so small that close-position spawns had the shortestrush distance of any map on the ladder, even including the reviledBlistering Sands and Steppes of War maps from Season 1. Variousother maps, particularly Backwater Gulch and Typhon Peaks, had

widespread complaints as well but were relatively more reasonable.Delta Quadrant and Slag Pits, on the other hand, were quickly seen to

be fundamentally flawed.

Season 3

Map Pool:Abyssal CavernsAntiga ShipyardBackwater GulchNerazim CryptSearing Crater

Shakuras PlateauThe Shattered TempleTalDarim Altar LETyphon PeaksXelNaga Caverns

In Season 3, Blizzard made some major adjustments to the mappool, most notably eliminating Metalopolis, Delta Quadrant, Slag Pits,and the ever-unique Scrap Station. Though Metalopolis was not auniversally liked map, it was a generally popular one as it wasconsidered fairly balanced, so its removal was slightly surprising.Further confusing in this regard was Blizzards stated reason forremoving the map: balance issues with close spawning positions.

While this was a common complaint about the map, it was also one


23/303


that was easily rectified, as the developers could simply eliminate theclose-spawn possibility. Blizzard did, however, hint that Metalopolismay return in a future season, and that eventually turned out to be thecase.

The maps added to the pool in Season 3 were mostly medium tolarge macro maps, all with four spawning locations. One exception

was the most infamous of the additions: Searing Crater, which turnedout to be a small map (though still with four starting positions) andnothing but several narrow chokes providing access to two expansionsin front of the main base. Nerazim Crypt and Abyssal Caverns werenot as widely disliked, though the latter posed minor balance issues

with its extremely close-by-air spawning positions, and both maps

were criticized as being unimaginative. Antiga Shipyard, a larger map with mostly unproblematic expansion chokes and locations, was better accepted by the community, though there was slight concernwith Siege Tanks ability to hit the main bases gas from the nearestclockwise spawns third base. This map was, however, balanced andliked enough to find its way onto the pro circuit, though often withcross-spawns enforced. While the Season 3 map pool came withchanges both popular and unpopular, the changes overall signified

progress in regard to balance.Season 4

Map Pool:Abyssal CavernsAntiga ShipyardMetalopolis (close spawns removed)

Nerazim CryptShakuras PlateauThe Shattered Temple (close spawns removed)TalDarim AltarXelNaga Caverns

The Season 4 map pool featured fewer alterations than those ofprevious seasons, but it was also considered, by virtually everyone, to

be the best yet. The maps with the most complaintsBackwaterGulch, Searing Crater, Nerazim Crypt, and Typhon Peakswereremoved, and those that required only minor adjustmentsTheShattered Temple and Metalopoliswere fixed. Of the latter type, theadjustment specifically implemented for both maps was the removalof the possibility for close spawning positions. Now players could


24/303


spawn only in cross or close-by-air positions. It should also be notedthat this was the only ladder season in 2011 that featured no newmaps, only those that had been seen in previous seasons. Thoughsome players had complaints about XelNaga Caverns (the only map to

be included in every seasons pool), it lacked the glaring flaws of thosethat had been removed.

Season 5

Map Pool:Antiga ShipyardArid Plateau

Entombed ValleyMetalopolisShakuras PlateauThe Shattered TempleTalDarim AltarXelNaga Caverns

For Season five, Blizzard made relatively few changes to the map

pool. They removed Abyssal Caverns and Nerazim Crypt and addedtwo newly created ones: Arid Plateau and Entombed Valley. AridPlateau, which features a mostly open middle area but has multiplenarrow chokes leading to the natural expansion, was generally theleast well-received. Entombed Valley, on the other hand, wasimmediately picked up for GSL play (beginning with the January 2012season, which actually began with Up & Down matches in December).This is a mid-sized map with four starting points and two nearby

expansions, both accessed via ramps (as well as the main base, whichitself has a ramp leading to the first expansion). Additionally, itsmiddle features an open space with one XelNaga Watchtower, butthere are several choke points between this open area and theexpansions, making positioning, Watchtower control, and generalscouting important. Since this ladder season did not begin untilDecember 20, there was little opportunity to fully assess the maps

balance in 2011, but Entombed Valley seemed to be far favored overArid Plateau.

Comparing each ladder seasons map pool to that preceding it, it was clear that Blizzards understanding of map balance progressedthroughout the year. Though there were still complaints to be found,especially when comparing Blizzards ladder pools to the pools of


25/303


major tournaments, it is almost inarguably true that every pool was animprovement over the last. It should also be noted that even someprevalent tournament maps came to be seen as imbalanced over time.Map design would certainly continue to evolve over the life of

StarCraft II, but Blizzards ladder pool by the end of 2011 was widely viewed as satisfactory relative to the current understanding of thegame.

Tournament Maps

In 2011 professional play, most leagues opted to use a combinationof Blizzard maps (though sometimes in slightly altered form) andindependently developed maps. Most of the latter type promotedmacro-oriented play and used more dynamic tilesets than those foundin Blizzard maps. Because of these specific characteristics as well asthe general balance of the maps, many players preferred them toBlizzards own, though with the exception of TalDarim Altar, Blizzardopted not to incorporate any of these into its ladder map pool during

the year.Nearly all of the independently developed tournament maps usedin 2011 were especially unique in some way. Size was a particularlynotable quality in many cases. Crevasse, used widely until roughly thelast quarter of the year, was one of the biggest maps seen inprofessional play and, until the winter version of BelShir Beachdebuted, was the only one to use an ice terrain tileset. Another largemap developed outside of Blizzard was Terminus, a greatly altered

version of Blizzards own map by the same name, which has fourspawning points, medium to long rush distances, and two easilydefended expansions near the main base. Calm Before the Storm, amap used in the GSL near the end of the year, was arguably the mosteconomy-friendly of them all, with rush distances unsurpassed by anyother tournament map and two natural expansions even more easilydefended than those on Terminus. However, this one turned out to beso strongly macro-favored that it was considered by some to be too

big, as its layout virtually prohibits early rush strategies and thus leads

to a frequently predictable and uneventful early game.Aside from TalDarim Altar, the remaining of the large-sized maps

used professionally in 2011 was Daybreak. Of all the tournamentmaps, Daybreak stood out as the sole macro map with only twostarting positions. While it is similar to Calm Before the Storm in that


26/303


its rush distances are extremely long, however, such distances arebalanced by the fact that players automatically know their opponentsspawning point, making early-game pressures viable. Still, for manygames played on Daybreak during the year, players were able to

establish three bases relatively easily, though fourth bases, which begin expanding closer to the other player, proved more difficult tosecure in most situations.

Size was not the only way in which non-Blizzard maps differedfrom those on the ladder, however. The professional leagues also sawthe use of maps with three spawning points, a unique concept, thoughthese were largely dropped for various reasons toward the end of 2011.One of these was an iCCup map called Testbug. Testbug was unusual

not only because it was the first major tournament map with threestarting positions but also because it incorporates four distinct visualmotifs (including lava, grass, twilight, and stone areas) technicallycomprised of six tilesets. These elements create dynamics in bothlayout and appearance that other maps lack, thus Testbug remainedpopular in tournament play for much of the year. XelNaga Fortress,another tournament map, has a similar design but is slightly moreconfined. This one includes three starting points and a single XelNaga

Watchtower that self-destructs at the seven-minute mark, a featureimplemented because of the map dominance that could be obtained by its control alone. Due to issues related to size and rotationalsymmetry, however, both of these maps had been dropped from mostleagues by the end of 2011.

The map often regarded as the most visually appealing in 2011 wasalso developed outside of Blizzard. This was BelShir Beach, the onlyprofessional map to utilize beach terrain and traversable shallow

water (additionally, the winter version of the map had falling snow). Itwas also one of the more rush-friendly maps used in tournament play,as it was mid-sized, had two starting points, and included ramps onlyat the area outside of each players natural expansion. With its uniquestrategic and aesthetic characteristics, BelShir Beach helped to roundout the professional map pool, particularly in the GSL.

Finally, in November the GSL made a significant alteration to anumber of the maps used in their tournaments: they removed the rich(gold) mineral fields from all that had them. This was viewed as anattempt to balance Terrans ability to save up Orbital Commandenergy, establish a base at one of the gold expansions, and instantlycall down multiple MULEs. Depending on how much energy had beensaved, this tactic could allow a Terran player to almost immediatelyrecoup and surpass all costs of establishing the base, giving them a


27/303


strong economic advantage in the game. By eliminating rich mineralfields, the GSL allowed the playing field to remain level for all players

while negating the potential for map-based economic imbalance.Overall, while every major tournament used its own selection of

both ladder maps and maps developed outside of Blizzard, thosedeveloped independently were often more macro-oriented and more

visually appealing. While some ofBlizzards ladder pool maps werewell balanced and, in the case of maps like Metalopolis and ShakurasPlateau, even turned out to be favorites among some players, non-Blizzard tournament maps were more spectator-friendly on the whole.If there was one aspect of the map pool that professional leaguesseemed to aim for, it was variety. In order to provide the most

interesting playing fields, the leagues generally built their pools out ofmaps that accommodated varying play styles and provided dynamicvisuals from game to game.

Tournament Map Breakdown

DreamHack

Stockholm Invitational Summer Valencia Invitational Winter

Antiga Shipyard X X

Crevasse X X

Crossfire X X

Daybreak X

Dual Sight X X

Metalopolis X X X X

Shakuras Plateau X X X X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X X

Terminus X X X X

The Shattered TempleX

Xel'Naga Caverns X X


28/303


Global StarCraft II League

Global StarCraft II Team League

January MarchWorld

ChampionshipMay

Super

TournamentJuly August October November

Antiga Shipyard X X X

Bel'Shir Beach X X X X X

Blistering Sands X

Calm Before the

StormX

Crevasse X X X X X

Crossfire X X X X X X X X

Daybreak X X X

Delta Quadrant X

Dual Sight X X X X X X

Jungle Basin X

Lost Temple X

Metalopolis X X X X X X X X

Scrap Station X X X

Shakuras Plateau X X X

Steppes of War X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X X X X X X

Terminus X X X X X X X

Xel'Naga Caverns X X X X X X

Xel'Naga Fortress X X X X X

February March May2011 Season 1

(June-October)

Antiga Shipyard X

Bel'Shir Beach X X

Crevasse X X X

Crossfire X X X X

Daybreak X

Dual Sight X X X

Lost Temple X

Metalopolis X X X X

Scrap Station X

Shakuras Plateau X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X X

Terminus X X X X

Typhon Peaks X

Xel'Naga Caverns X X XXel'Naga Fortress X X X


29/303


IGN Pro League

Intel Extreme Masters

Major League Gaming

Season 1 Season 2 Season 3

Antiga Shipyard X

Crevasse X X X

CrossfireX X

Daybreak X

Metalopolis X X X

Shakuras Plateau X X X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X

Terminus X X X

The Shattered Temple X X X


Xel'Naga Fortress X

V - EuropeV - Southeast

Asia

V - World

ChampionshipVI - Cologne VI - Guangzhou VI - New York

Blistering Sands X X X

Delta Quadrant X X X

Dual Sight X X X

Kulas Ravine X

Lost Temple X X X

Metalopolis X X X X X X

Scrap Station X X X

Shakuras Plateau X X X X

The Shattered Temple X X X

Steppes of War X X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X

Terminus X X X


Dallas Columbus Anaheim Raleigh Orlando Providence

Antiga Shipyard X X

Crossfire X

Dual Sight X X X X

Metalopolis X X X X X X

Scrap Station X

Shakuras Plateau X X X X X X

The Shattered Temple X X X X X X

Tal'Darim Altar X X X X X

Testbug X X X X

Typhon Peaks X



30/303


North American Star League

TeamLiquid StarLeague

Season 3 (only 2011 TSL tournament)CrevasseCrossfireMetalopolis

Shakuras PlateauTalDarim AltarTerminusXelNaga Caverns

Season 1 Season 2

Antiga Shipyard X

Backwater Gulch X

Bel'Shir Beach XCrevasse X X

Crossfire X

Dual Sight X

Metalopolis X X

Tal'Darim Altar X X

Terminus X X

The Shattered Temple X X

Typhon Peaks X



31/303

Ch. 2Strategies and Metagame

With StarCraft II having been released mid-2010, standardstrategies per race and matchup had already evolved quite a bitleading into 2011, but they could by no means be considered fully

matured. The year saw the game undergo significant development inthis regard. Zerg players learned ways to contend with the massivelypowerful Protoss armies, Terran players learned the value of the puremech option in TvT, and Protoss was forced to deal with the myriad of

viable strategies Terran had in PvT, including some that came to be viewed as outright imbalanced. While dynamics varied widely frommatchup to matchup, there was virtually always some development to

be had (even PvP, which was largely static until September, saw minor

variations on its standard four-Gate build). At the same time,however, standard strategies were developed throughout the year, andthese strategies, balanced with viable but less conventionalalternatives, in turn led to dynamic StarCraft II metagames, wheresuccess was dependent not only upon the ability to master themechanics necessary to execute certain strategies but to outwit onesopponent at the same time. This, arguably, is where the beauty of thegame is found.

Protoss

Protoss had an interesting 2011 in a number of ways. Near the beginning of the year, many Zerg players considered the race to beoverpowered in PvZ, due to the races ability to max out with the

seemingly unstoppable Stalker/Colossus death ball. However, as theyear progressed, the race began to show more and more weaknesses.Eventually, as the community began to notice generally low Protossnumbers in major tournaments (especially in the GSL, where, for boththe October and November seasons, only five of the thirty-two Code S


32/303

Strategies and Metagame 29

participants were Protoss players), the race became consideredequally balanced with the others, if not perhaps slightly weaker.

Protoss also had the most unused high-tier units throughout the year. Whereas Zergs Brood Lords were generally effective if used

properly in endgame scenarios and Terrans Battlecruisers saw someutility in specific late-game TvT situations, Protoss Archons, Carriers,and Mothership struggled, to varying degrees, to find a place in theraces army. Of these, the Archon eventually came to be used with themost regularity, thanks to Patch 1.3.3 in May, which endowed the unit

with the Massive attribute and increased its range from 2 to 3. At thispoint, Archons in small to moderate numbers proved to be useful inProtoss armies, especially against Speedlings, Mutalisks, and Terran

bio, due to their splash damage and high shields. In fact, the Archonitself seemed to achieve great balance, as a unit that could not bemassed with effectiveness but that was an inarguably valuable asset tothe larger army.

The Mothership saw much less use than the Archon throughoutthe year, but some players (especially KiWiKaKi) did prove it to havesignificant utility in certain late-game scenarios. While the unit wasinarguably a powerful one, the problem as perceived by many Protoss

players was that it was too cost-prohibitive to be viable in mostsituations. For many, 400 minerals, 400 gas, and 160 seconds forproduction (along with the requirement of building a Fleet Beacon)

was simply too much of an investment for a unit that essentially became a giant target for the opponent. Still, when used carefullyparticularly when utilizing Mass Recall for various types ofharassment, or Vortex to reduce an opposing army temporarily to aneasily manageable sizethe Mothership could at times be so powerfulas to directly affect the outcome of the game. Regardless of itsoccasional usefulness, however, Blizzard announced at BlizzCon inOctober that the unit would likely be removed from the game uponrelease of the Heart of the Swarm expansion.

Of all units among all races in the game, the Carrier was by far theleast-used in 2011 professional play. Though it was capable of dealingmassive amounts of damage per second, the unit was too expensiveand too easily targeted to be viable. Furthermore, the Void Ray was acost-effective alternative to the Carrier, filled a similar role in theProtoss army, and did not require the time and resource investment ofthe Fleet Beacon. Virtually every time the Carrier was used inprofessional play (save for an October GSL game between HongUnand Keen), it was either unnecessary or unsuccessful. Interestingly, asopposed to the Archon and the Mothership, the Carrier received no


33/303


patch buffs during the year and ultimately seemed to be considered alost cause by the developers. Due to its nonuse and apparentineffectiveness, Blizzard announced that, along with the Mothership,the Carrier would be another unit that would be removed from the

game in Heart of the Swarm.

Versus Protoss

Of the three mirror matchups, PvP was often considered to be theleast dynamic, especially until September. During the first threequarters of the year, there was essentially one build that made sense inPvP: the four-Gate. Even when playing defensively, it was too easy tolose with any other build, as aggressive Protoss players could easily

warp units directly into the opponents main base with proxy Pylons.Though defensive three-Gate builds could work on occasion, mostadept players knew how to maintain the aggression necessary to pushthrough and win with superior unit counts. For the most part, theextent of the dynamic that existed in PvP came in the form of

variations on the same build (including double- versus single-gasfour-Gates as well as transitions into Blink Stalkers or, more rarely,Dark Templar). Ultimately, during this part of the year, most PvP

matches came down to micro, as the builds used by opposing playerswould be virtually, if not literally, the same.Blizzards first attempt at patching PvP, so as to make non four-

Gate builds viable, came in May with Patch 1.3.3. At this point thedevelopers increased Warp Gate research time by twenty in-gameseconds, decreased the production time of Sentries by five in-gameseconds (in order to allow marginally greater energy build-up fordefensive Force Fields), and decreased Pylons power radius from 7.5

to 6.5 (so as to make it more difficult to warp units directly into theenemy base from proxy Pylons). However, this patch ultimately hadlittle effect on the matchup. The Sentry change made no noteworthydifference, and while the Pylon change did make offensive warp-insmore difficult, an aggressive Protoss player could often force thedefending player to focus his units on attacking the incoming armyrather than destroying the nearby Pylon. What resulted from thesechanges was essentially a delayed four-Gate.

In September Blizzard implemented Patch 1.4.0, which furtherrepresented their attempt to make alternate builds viable in PvP, andthis time they were successful. By reducing vision up ramps by 1 (forall races), increasing Immortal range from 5 to 6, increasing Blinkresearch time from 110 to 140 in-game seconds, and outrightdisallowing units from being warped in on ramps, this patch made


34/303


four-Gate defense significantly easier (except on maps TalDarim Altarand BelShir Beach, with have no ramps leading to the main base).

With these changes, Immortals, which are essentially a direct counterto Stalkers, became able to fire more volleys from the high ground

before the Stalkers could return fire. Additionally, with ramp warp-insnow impossible and Blink research delayed, it was more difficult foraggressive Protoss players to warp directly into the opponents main

base. Finally, Immortals also became more useful beyond their early-game defensive capabilities. These units, which were previously out-ranged by Stalkers, were notorious for getting caught behind the mainarmy and remaining unable to deal (or tank) damage duringengagements. With both the Immortal and the Stalker having a range

of 6, however, this problem was mitigated, and Immortals became amore useful element in the midgame Protoss army.There were several PvP strategies that developed as a result of

Patch 1.4.0. Despite the previously lengthened research time, BlinkStalkers became widely used. Those units, if controlled well, couldovercome the utility of low Immortal counts to gain the upper hand inthe game. Due to the improved viability of Blink Stalkers, DarkTemplar also became more common. Since players executing fast

Blink Stalker builds had delayed Robotics Facilities, the player withthe Blink Stalkers would have no ability to produce Observers todetect the cloaked units. In such scenarios, there was often little aplayer could do to defend against Dark Templar.

Another popular PvP strategy that resulted from the patch was theBlink Stalker/Observer build. In this build, players would produceStalkers (typically from three Warp Gates) while constructing aRobotics Facility and Twilight Council for an Observer and Blink tech.

With Blink Stalkers and an Observer, the Protoss player is free toBlink in and out of the opponents main base, allowing for constantpressure and forcing the other player to remain active in defending,taking attention away from basic macro and production. While the

builds primary disadvantage was its delayed expansion, this strategyhad the benefit of being safe and allowing the player to apply highpressure on the other Protoss while simultaneously providing the techfor superior mobility.

Proceeding into the midgame, army compositions were frequentlyColossus-heavy, even more so, at times, than midgame Protoss armiesin PvT or PvZ, given Protoss lack of easily-produced hard counters tothe unit. Blink Stalkers were also often necessary to contest mapcontrol. Aside from these units, most any other unit could be mixed ineffectively as well, including Charged Zealots, Archons, Dark Templar,


35/303


and Immortals. Void Rays and Phoenixes were not as commoncomplements, as the tech path to those units was often an impracticalone to take, but even they found their way into the mix on occasion.

PvP struggled to find variety during most of the year and quickly

gained a reputation for being the dullest matchup in StarCraft II.However, this problem was ultimately addressed by Blizzard. Thoughthere were still concerns related to the degree to which opening buildorders determined the outcome of the game, PvP at least escaped themonotony of seeing four-Gate variations in virtually every game.

When this variety was introduced into the matchup, it underwent afundamental change, going from one that was largely decided by unitcontrol to one that was decided through a closer combination of

control and the ability to read the other players strategy.

Versus Terran

As Sentries keep Protoss safe from anything as aggressive as athree-Barracks opening pressure in PvT, most Terran players optedeither for a fast expand, a one-Barracks expand, or a two-Barracksexpand throughout the year in that matchup. Therefore, while three-Gate variations and early Robotics facilities keep Protoss players safe

in the early game, the most reasonable options were almost always toeither expand after one Gateway, build a Nexus first, or attempt to endthe game early with a four-Gate (additionally, Stargate and DarkTemplar openings were seen, though much less frequently). Of these

builds, the one-Gate expand was the most common.The metagame in PvT developed to the point that most games

advancing to midgame involved as wide a variety of units as Stalkers,Sentries, Zealots (usually with Charge), and Colossi. Since Colossi, as

powerful units that deal large amounts of splash damage, areinstrumental in fighting off Terrans tightly clumped bio armies, andsince Stalkers are useful as standard ranged units in all matchups, theMarauder was Terrans mainstay against Protoss. As a basic butpowerful Armored anti-armor unit, the Marauder is able to bothcounter Stalkers and hold up relatively well to the splash damage ofmoderate Colossus counts. To counter them in turn, Protoss players

would produce Charged Zealots, which fall slowly to Marauders, todeal large amounts of damage against the units. Additionally, Sentriesare the perfect final piece to this unit mix, as their Force Fields forceTerran units into positions in which they become further vulnerable tothe splash damage of Colossi and cannot retreat from Zealots.

Following the logic of the PvT metagame, the late game sawregular use of nearly every non-air unit in the Protoss arsenal. Since


36/303


Terran players used Vikings to counter high Colossus counts, Protossplayers would often produce no more than four Colossi beforeincorporating High Templar into the mix, for Psionic Storm. ThoughHigh Templar can be rendered ineffective by Ghosts, the control

required to EMP High Templar makes them a slightly more difficultunit for Terran players to counter when compared to the use of

Vikings against Colossi. High Templar were also vital for neutralizingGhosts via Feedback, as the Ghosts EMP ability, knocking out unitsshields in the radius of its effect, could severely weaken a Protossarmy in an instant. Additionally, the best Protoss players becameskilled at spreading their High Templar in order to mitigate theeffectiveness of EMPs against those units specifically. With Templar

tech, Protoss players also made frequent use of Archons (primarilyafter Patch 1.3.3) to tank on the front lines while themselves dealingsplash damage. Finally, Dark Templar were used to harass expansionsin the late game (especially on large maps), and the Warp Prism wasused for various forms of harassment as well.

Alternatively, while the four-Gate was primarily a PvP strategy, it was occasionally used against Terran as well, especially to punishhigh-economy openings. Frequently, Terran players could spot this

build incoming and would construct multiple Bunkers and pull largenumbers of SCVs to repair them as the Protoss player pushed in.However, Protoss players would therefore warp in extra Sentries anduse Force Fields to block the SCVs from repairing the Bunkers. Inthese cases, with the high number of units and constantreinforcements, it was possible for the Protoss to quickly eliminate theBunkers and break the Terrans defense to win the game early. Whilethis was often a punishing build for Terrans focusing their efforts onestablishing a superior economy for the midgame, it was never aguaranteed win. With perfect defense on large maps (as PuMademonstrated against MC in the NASL Season 1 finals) evenCommand Center-first builds can hold up to four-Gate pressure. Still,against flustered or unprepared Terrans the four-Gate remained a

viable response to economy-oriented openings.Though Gateway/Robotics Facility strategies were most common

in the metagame, there were alternatives for players who wished totake more skill-intensive, unconventional approaches to PvT. Onerelatively prevalent build of this type was heavy Phoenix play. Withlarge numbers of Phoenixes, Protoss players can achieve absolute mapcontrol while harassing worker lines (using the units Graviton Beamability) and occasionally picking off army units. With support from asmall ground army to help defend against eventual pushes from the


37/303


Terran player, Phoenixes can also quickly and effectively weakenTerran armies by lifting ground units, thus rendering them uselessuntil the Graviton Beam effect wears off. As Phoenixes are easily killed

when caught out of position, however, this build requires great control

and top-level multitasking to be successful. Additionally, due to theease of countering the build (there is little that mass Phoenixes can doagainst Marine/Thor armies with Missile Turrets for defense),Phoenix-oriented strategies, while dangerous if used correctly, were

viable in only certain situations. Therefore, despite the benefits of the build, the difficulty in executing it successfully meant it was rare inPvT.

Finally, the issue in PvT that caused Protoss the most trouble in

2011 was the Terran 1/1/1 (a one-Barracks, one-Factory, one-Starportall-in). Though it did not begin to show up prominently until August,it was quickly considered to be immensely overpowered againstProtoss. In the early game, the threat of Marines, Siege Tanks,Banshees, and SCVs (either tanking damage or repairing the mechunits) was one that few Protoss armies were prepared to deflect. WhileImmortals (after their range buff in Septembers Patch 1.4.0) andColossi could be effective in holding off this build, the precision

required for them to do so was considered to be vastlydisproportionate to the skill required to execute the build. However,despite the power of the 1/1/1 against Protoss, it was not used in themajority of PvT games. While some Terran players made frequent useof the build, most felt more comfortable with the conventional bioapproach. Therefore, while Protoss players had to contendoccasionally with the potentially imbalanced 1/1/1, they were often inmore manageable territory when playing against Terran.

Overall, many PvT games came down to control, timing, andmacro. With generally standard strategies on each side, players oftenfound advantages not through achieving perfect counters to theiropponents but through positioning their armies in superior ways,attacking when at a significant tech or supply advantage, ormaintaining superior income throughout the game. Though PvT sawits problems throughout 2011 and even into 2012, it was generally

both a balanced and an interesting matchup.

Versus Zerg

Against Zerg, Protoss players eventually narrowed their play downto three main strategies: three-Gate Sentry expands, Forge fastexpands into Stargate harassment, and Forge fast expands intostandard Protoss ground armies (early Dark Templar harassment was


38/303


also viable but was considered risky due to the gas investmentrequired by the build and the ease of countering). The three-GateSentry expand, though the least common of the three main PvZ builds,

was often the safest, as it offered the greatest possibility for ground

army unit production if a Zerg all-in was spotted after the build wasunderway. In most situations, Sentries without Zealot and Stalkersupport were sufficient defense against early Zergling pressure on theexpansion, as the Protoss player could easily use Force Fields,

building placement, and eventually Photon Cannons to prevent unitsfrom running into the main base. Furthermore, by creating so manySentries (typically six to eight) in the early game, Protoss pushes in thetransition from early game to midgame were aided greatly by the

number of Force Fields made possible by the energy saved up beforethe attack. Following the first push (usually consisting of acombination of Stalkers and Zealots accompanied by the Sentries), theProtoss player could transition into virtually any strategy or armycomposition, though it was important to make up for the somewhatdelayed expansion by applying pressure and taking map control.

While the three-Gate Sentry expand was the safest of the threemost common PvZ builds, Forge fast expansions were considered

generally safe as well and were far more popular. Since most Zergplayers preferred to establish a fast economy in the early game, theyrarely had the units to contend with even one or two well-placedPhoton Cannons at the Protoss expansion. Additionally, if the Zergplayer became too greedy and attempted to use a Hatchery-first build,Protoss players with a fast Forge were free to punish the lack ofZerglings by Cannon rushing the expansion. However, if the Zergplayer expected a Forge fast expand and responded with propertiming, the build could be effectively punished by Baneling busts orheavy Roach pressure (this was demonstrated perhaps most famously

by Leenock against NaNiwa in the MLG Providence grand finals).Even if Roaches could not be used to outright kill the Protoss player,they could often be positioned in such a way as to attack the Nexus orother buildings at the expansion while avoiding Photon Cannon fire.

As this build delays Protoss ability to build a sizeable ground army,Forge fast expands leave players unable to fend off heavy openingpressure unless they spend resources on multiple well-placedCannons.

However, for successful uses of the Forge fast expand (which,given Zerg players proclivity for longer macro games, was themajority of them), the two basic follow-ups depended on the kind ofgame the Protoss player wanted to play. Stargate play following such


39/303


an expansion was aimed primarily at catching the Zerg player off-guard and damaging their economy and infrastructure to the pointthat they could not come back. Typically in these cases, the Protossplayer would produce one to three Void Rays followed by Phoenix

production. Against an unprepared Zerg, such compositions couldquickly damage production capabilities and economy, as thePhoenixes would use the Graviton Beam to lift Queens and destroythem while remaining safe from harm and, in the process, impedingthe Zergs ability to spawn extra Larvae. Once Queens were clearedout, Drones and ground army units could be freely picked off until theZerg player was able to produce Spore Crawlers, Hydralisks, orsufficient Queen counts, the latter two threats often being manageable

through further Graviton Beam use. The weakness of this build,however, was that though it could severely damage an unpreparedZerg, it was somewhat easily countered by Zerg players who spottedthe build incomingsomething that, with adequate Overlord scouting,

was not difficult to do. With the right number of Queens, some carefulTransfusions, and several well-placed Spore Crawlers, the Zerg playercould negate the air threat while building a superior ground army.

Ground army production was another frequently used and

versatile follow-up to the Forge fast expand. In these cases, theProtoss player would either attempt to pressure the Zerg player afterseveral cycles of unit production (the Zerg usually having taken a third

base) or would simply defend while teching to an army with heavyColossus support. Army composition in either case was frequently thedetermining factor of success. Zerg players generally knew the timingof first-wave pressures but, after taking a third base, usually had anarrow window of opportunity to produce an army that could contend

with the incoming threat. Therefore, if one side had units that stronglycountered the other, the battle could be one-sided. If the Protossplayer won this first engagement, they were often free to push furtherinto the Zerg base to inflict severe damage. If the Zerg player came outon top, on the other hand, the three-base economy allowed them toout-produce the Protoss and apply enough pressure to deny furtherexpansion. If both players scouted properly and developed a well-composed army, the game would be pushed to a longer length, and theplayer with superior decision-making in the more unpredictable lategame would come out victorious. However, on the professional level,so many dynamics could take place within the build in order to disruptthe other player that such games only occasionally played out in aforeseeable fashion.


40/303


In long PvZ games, Protoss players would often upgrade Blink fortheir Stalkers. Doing so offers three benefits. First, Blink makes theunits significantly more dangerous against Roach-based compositions,as damaged Stalkers can be Blinked back to allow their shields to

regenerate before reentering the fray. Blink also makes the alreadyquick Stalkers significantly more mobile, thus allowing Protossplayers to maintain a degree of map control against the ever-mobileZerg army. Finally, Blink Stalkers in high enough numbers were oftenthe most viable way for Protoss players to take out Brood Lords in thelate game. Since it was usually cost- and time-prohibitive to constructStargates and produce a sufficient number of Void Rays to directlycounter the units (especially if the Brood Lords were supported by

Corruptors), air units were only occasionally used as counters to thistech. Any Protoss army going into a long PvZ game, however, wouldalready have a high Stalker count. With Blink, the units could jumppast Broodlings, which otherwise keep Stalkers pushed out of firingrange, in order to take out the Brood Lords. For head-on battles theColossus was often the go-to unit to support Stalker armies, providingcontinual splash damage from a safe distance against any groundunits attacking the Stalkers.

Protoss eventual struggle against Zerg was the result, largely, ofZerg players increasingly realizing that, even with the ability to quicklyremax, it was often futile to attempt to fight a maxed-out Protoss armyhead-on (though players did discover several creative ways to deal

with such armies). Therefore, the most successful ZvP players learnedthe timing of Protoss builds and attempted either to punish thempreemptively or, more commonly, play a risky early game to establisha better economy. From here, superior armies could be produced justin time to hold off Protoss attacks and, afterward, could push forstrong counterattacks. To counter such strategies in turn, Protossplayers used various techniques to disrupt Zerg macro during theearly game, such as Hatchery-blocking Pylons, Cannon rushes, earlyZealot pressures, awkward attack timings, and Warp Prismharassment. By the end of the year, the metagame had been stable insome aspects, but Protoss players were still mixing up their play in

various ways to impede Zerg macro. With such experimentation stilltaking place, PvZ would take beyond 2011 to solidify.


41/303


Terran

At least among professional players, Terran remained by far the

most popular of the three races throughout 2011. This may be a resultof the fact that, whereas Zerg and Protoss generally have one primary way to respond to any given opposing strategy, Terran has multipleoptions for viable opening builds as well as reactive compositions. Foreach specific matchup, Terran could often safely choose from two ofthe following three general options: heavy bio with slight mechsupport (primarily in the form of Medivacs), bio/mech mixes(especially Marines and Siege Tanks), and pure mech (which wouldoften utilize any combination of Hellions, Siege Tanks, Thors, and

Vikings).Due to Marines low cost, high damage output, and ability to

attack both ground and air units, they were commonly used in allmatchups; however, builds varied significantly, as did expansiontimings. Throughout the year, the use of individual units fluctuated as

well. Reapers went in and out of style, Hellion use rose quickly aroundthe middle of the year, and Ravens remained largely underused inproportion to their late-game utility. Ghost use started off slowly but

became vastly more prevalent after Patch 1.3.3 lowered the units costfrom 150 minerals/150 gas to 200 minerals/100 gas. While Ghosts

were occasionally used in TvT, either to punish bio openings or to gainlate-game positioning with Tac Nuke Strikes (commonly called,simply, Nukes), they were primarily used in TvP, as the EMP abilitycould quickly devastate a tightly clumped Protoss army, knocking out

both shields and energy. Against Zerg the unit was not commonlyused until closer to the end of the year, when players began to realize

the full effectiveness of the Sniper Round (Snipe) ability againstBrood Lords and Ultralisks.

Finally, while the Hellion had been considered in the early days ofStarCraft II to be weak and almost useless, sentiment toward the unitchanged when the extent of its effectiveness against both worker linesand Marine-heavy armies was discovered. When this metagame shiftoccurred roughly mid-year, it was standard to see Hellions usedagainst both Zerg and Terran, and the unit became slightly more

prevalent in early TvP as well. Whether by running them directly into bases or dropping them from Medivacs, Terran players could useHellions even in small numbers to quickly decimate worker lines.Even after Blizzard decreased the damageboost gained from the unitsInfernal Pre-Igniter upgrade, Hellions remained a dangerous threat


42/303


that could change the outcome of a game against any race in a matterof seconds.

Versus Protoss

TvP played out differently from the other Terran matchups, withplayers using Siege Tanks and other mech units in only specificsituations. Since Marauders are extremely effective against Stalkers,are capable of slowing Charged Zealots (once the Concussive Shellsupgrade is researched), and have the armor to stand up to moderateColossus counts, they proved to be as indispensable as Marines, whichsimply deal large amounts of damage in general. Naturally, withMarine- and Marauder-heavy armies it would not make sense to forgo

Medivac production, thus the Marine/Marauder/Medivac (MMM)composition was most commonly used in TvP throughout the year.Not only is this a simply powerful composition, but it is also extremelymobile and allows for effective drop-based harassment. Later in thegame, Viking use was common to counter large Colossus counts. Evenif the Vikings were eventually destroyed by Stalkers, the elimination ofColossi made it exponentially easier for Terran players to deal withProtoss armies.

As the year progressed, Terran players incorporated Ghosts intotheir mid- and late-game mixes more and more. It was in May,however, that Ghost use saw its first spike, as Blizzard made the unitsignificantly less gas-expensive. Ghosts, once one developed aneconomy to accommodate them, proved to be useful in virtually anysituation against Protoss players. The units EMP could renderSentries and High Templartwo units that present significant threatsto Terran bio armiesuseless by removing their casting energy, and

the ability was also instrumental against more basic army units,removing their shields before large engagements. Ghosts becameespecially dangerous in quantities of four or more, at which pointTerran players could simply blanket Protoss armies with EMPs, thuspotentially depleting their total hit points by hundreds before enteringinto head-on battle. Ghost use was throttled in November whenBlizzard implemented a patch that reduced the EMPs area of effect,

but it remained, to some extent, an important part of the TvPmatchup.

Beginning roughly in August, a TvP build began gainingprominence and was quickly realized to be so powerful that manyplayers, even some Terrans themselves, claimed it was imbalanced.This build was the single Barracks, single Factory, single Starport all-in, commonly known as the 1/1/1. When it was executed properly


43/303


and with SCVs pulled to tank damage, repair units, and constructBunkers outside of the Protoss base, there was little that Protossplayers could do to defend against the mix of Marines, Siege Tanks,and Banshees in the transition from early game to midgame. Though

the build was not absolutely impenetrable, it was overwhelminglyagreed that the precision and degree of skill required to counter the1/1/1 was vastly disproportionate to the ease of executing it.

Aside from the 1/1/1, which was used relatively seldomconsidering its strength, there was little variance in TvP builds on theside of Terran. Ultimately, the Terran goal in head-on battles was topunish Colossi with Vikings, neutralize High Templar and Sentries

with Ghosts, and stutter step away from Charging Zealots while

dealing direct damage with Medivac-supported Marines andMarauders. TvP was largely a contest of timing and control, thoughthe ability to gain economic superiority was as crucial as it is in anymatchup. While the Ghosts EMP and the 1/1/1 presented minorongoing balance issues, TvP remained one of the more entertainingmatchups throughout 2011.

Versus Terran

TvT games opened with a variety of strategies designed to disruptthe other players build and economy. One of the most frequently usedmethods of such disruption was to tech straight to Banshees (Cloakedor not, and occasionally produced with proxy Starports) to kill offSCVs. Due to the units range of attack and damage per volley, evenMarine-heavy armies could have difficulty defending against well-controlled Banshees in the early game, and Vikings were oftennecessary to present a sound defense against this type of harassment.

Other early attacks, particularly seen amongst Korean players and onsmaller maps, consisted of heavy bio all-ins, aided at times by Hellionsto deal extra range-of-effect damage, SCVs to tank damage, or, onmore rare occasions, Ghosts to quickly eliminate individual Marines.

Regardless of the early-game tactics used, if a TvT hit midgame itwas almost guaranteed to be a war of Siege Tanks with either Marineor Hellion (but most often Marine) support. Unless one player tried to

break the other with a Marauder push, the players would use thesecompositions while constantly battling for superior positioning andmultitasking Medivac drops on mineral lines. Through domino logic,

Vikings were also common in TvT, as they provide vision for SiegeTanks (which can shoot farther than they can see) whilesimultaneously eliminating any enemy air units. Because of theimportance of Viking support, many standard TvTs became a battle


44/303


for air superiority. In these cases, air superiority simply opened theway for ground superiority. At other times, however, it allowed playerswho controlled the air to incorporate Banshees or Battlecruisers intotheir late-game compositions.

While TvT did reach a notable degree of regularity in 2011, therewas a shift in the metagame that can be pinpointed to MLG Anaheimin July. Terran players figured out that in many scenarios, Hellions, inplace of Marines, can be a superior complement to Siege Tanks due totheir mobility, their effectiveness against Marines, and their similarlylow cost (primarily the fact that they require no gas). Even Marine-centric players like MarineKing began experimenting with Hellions

with great effectiveness at this point in the year.

On the other hand, there were still many who opted for more bio-h

Documents

The Year in StarCraft II 2011 PDF