Your thoughts on Atacama

Quick Note: this thread is not directed at black forest players; it’s for people who like open maps!

Atacama (or woodrush how some people call it) seems to be the first edition of a new open map in DE that has it’s own meta that is not a copy of Arabias Meta.

While on Arabia most players wall their base around the time they reach feudal age I have seen Pro games on Atacama where players don’t wall, only wall in resources, wall much more then on Arabia or even use stone walls (mostly in the center of the map).
I have also seen Pros go for fast castle strategies but also extensive feudal play. This makes this map quite exciting for me as the meta seems to not be completely figured out yet and is definitely different from Arabia.

In my opinion most open maps (like Valley, Serengeti, Lombardia (1v1),…) have failed to become an alternative to Arabia because most people play on them the same way they would on Arabia (perhaps with slight alterations to the build order / civ selection). And why would you play a copy of Arabia if you could just play the original?

Proof for that is golden pit / gold rush. Before we could favourite a map those maps had the same pickrate as Arabia. After the feature to choose a favourite map was introduced the playrate of Arabia skyrocketed while the playrate of golden pit / gold rush fell to single digits.

→ back then people just used this map as “Arabia” and played the same build orders in dark + feudal age.

Therefore I am really happy to finally see an open map in the mappool that can be played very differently from Arabia :slight_smile:

What do you think? Do you agree?
Would you like to see it more often in the mappool?

1 Like

I dont like atacama, i dont know how to play it well and i dont like the middle only wood idea, just like gold rush and maps like these i feel that it forces u a lot of idle time until u get to the middle

Well that’s the thing I find interesting. People don’t know how exactly to play this map. There is no stale meta. Everybody is doing something different.

I like to build a defensive tower that covers gold (and berries if they are near) followed up by a one TC knight push in the castle Age.
Other people try to build a TC or castle in the middle of the wood as fast as possible…

i like it sometimes, but a lot of the time i dont like how raidy it is, whether i win or lose it feels like it rewards the cav civs even more, and generally if im facing a non meta civ, especially an archer civ its basically auto lose for them

eg koreans, italians etc are weak in arabia, they’re almost worthless in atacama…

so a lot of my matches that werent auto wins resolved around very similar civs just doing scrushing into a long feudal. and some random games where people tried to krepost or twr drop

i almost always pick berbers on that map, and they obviously do well, same for magyar, but guessing any scrush civ will do. i like berbers because it feels like their vil speed is fully maximised (like too many deer to push, so i always mill, and their speed helps there) having such an open map and tons of raids means vils need to be nimble, and by the time you get hand cart the vils are like little go carts…

I dont get what u mean by “even more” thou, u ussualy die in feudal age if u go cav in a normal game on arabia bc scouts are early feudal while archers are late feudal and scout dont create enough idle time to compansate for later, this is why i changed from a mostly cav playing guy to archers

it’s savage. I like it.

1 Like

I think it is the best open map it has ever been, it punishes players that heavily relies on walls and play defensive and it shows that many players don’t really know how to play without them, and unlike maps like serengetti and all the other maps you mentioned i’ve not seen someone that has managed to fully wall which for me is great (walls for me make the game a little bit boring), and at my level (around 1500s) i’ve played several games with different strategies including drush, maa, scs and all of them are decent builds, the best for me being scs into archers.

Maybe the problem is that many players are used to go archers directly, i haven’t had a problem playing archers in Atacama but i just don’t go direct archers, i’ve done scs into mass archers with italians, tatars and indians, maa into archers with burmese and aztecs, drush into archers with incas, malay and mayans and many of those games againts good cav civs.


thats really cool, most of my games have partly been resolved in feudal already, or if they havent then knights/camels/CA raid the back lines too easily while the archers get kept off the opposing base

I like Atacama a lot. I think along with Socotra it is probably my favorite map. Not even sure why I like it just that it feels differnt to Arabia.

1 Like

In my games with this map, I feel it is dominated by scouts. Archers are good if you want to punish people putting an early lumber camp in the centre. Otherwise the mobility offered by cavalry is crucial in this map. I have not yet felt the wood rush effect as all games that I have played on this map have ended by early Castle age.

I actually had a 1h 20min (in-game time) 1v1 match recently which was a mirror matchup (around 1300ELO).
It is possible to have long games but I agree that things can go downhill pretty fast if you’re army is out of position. Especially if it’s not cavalry…

It is a stupid map, not the thing that i don’t like open maps, i like all open maps and my favourite is Arabia, and if we had serengeti on the map pool i will make it the favourite, but Atacama is different, it is so stupid and so boring and the map style is just annoying and i feel the games in this boring map take more time to finish

Interesting, so for some the games are decided to early and for some the map feels slow.

I’m looking forward to actually see some average match times for this map :thinking:.
I would have guessed the games are a little bit shorter then on Arabia…

very trash map imo…

Could you elaborate on that?
I think the map generation is quite good. It looks natural (not as artificial as 4Lakes for example) yet very distinct.

I support maps that extend feudal action, but something a don’t like too much and it is similar to Golden pit is that the central batch it is too much round and centralized, so the player that put a castle in the middle gains too much advantage, and the snowball effect rush the match to his end very quickly.
I would like the central batch has more random shape, with little appends

I like maps with central resources like Atacama. But that’s because I usually get confused with distributed fights.

Now thats my favorite map followed closely by costal forest. When I first played Atacama i wasn’t fond of it. Mainly because i got confused thinking it was arabia. Since figuring the map out a bit i have tried to build most of my base in the trees. Its also fun to have a surprise mma pop out or sneak your vills over to tower rush. Im a lower elo so its a blast for me.

1 Like

A fun thing I do is wall in the woodchoppers early in the mid with houses and a barracks and then build a palisade gate which is the obvious weakspot. Usually the enemy scouts start attacking the gate at some point. → then I let them in (having build 2Spearmen first) → and it becomes a deathtrap as they can’t run away…

1 Like