Re: The perfect 3 vs 3 map
Date: February 13, 2010 03:03AM
I think you're in a bit of an old school mindset. Many of the old greats of this game prefer 1v1 or 2v2. But most newer and up-and-coming players prefer 3v3 or even larger maps.
A 2v2 vs 3v3 comparrison:
2v2 provides for a game of less luck, more land to control, and more in depth medium-term strategy.
3v3 provides for a game of more action, more interaction between various opponents/team-mates, and lots of opportunity for short term strategy/luck to effect the game.
I certainly see why many old pros prefer smaller games. But I think that is more an individual preference because I don't think there is a good case to be made taht 2v2 is better than 3v3. Personally, I really enjoy the way luck balances with strategy and teamwork in a 3v3. Embedding luck (ie probabilities) into a well thought out strategy is what I tend to enjoy most about games of skill.
My favorite 3v3 map is one you've probably never played on or considered:
Castile, Denmark, Nic vs Flanders, Tunis, Lithuania
(slight modifications: can be made near most of these lands)
This map is fairly ballanced and provides for a large amount of interaction with multiple opponents... making war strategy and development timing very important.