|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
Still in test stages, hoping people will play on it and give me feedback/bug reports ^__^;;
Changes:
- Fixed 1 o'clock/7 o'clock Starting Location to Nat distance imbalance
- Added buildable spots for turrets at center of map
- Removed gas at center expansion
- Added 1 more mineral at center expansion (now 7M0G)
+ Show Spoiler [Version 0.90] +Resources:Main: 9M1G Nat: 7M1G 2nd gas: 7M1G Center expo: 6M1G (Gas 2000) 7M
Concept and explanation:
I wanted to create a macro-orientated game that still requires lots of low tech-tree unit usage throughout the game.
The 12/3/6/9 expansions are accessible by two paths, one from the natural (the Crystal path, similar to Othello's cliff) and the other, the Blue Storm path. Any player can quickly set up their third expansion relatively safe from mid/late game units (tanks, dragoons, ultras etc), but to protect it, you too will require the low tech units. The area near the Blue Storm entrance is unbuildable.
Other than that, it's a relatively standard map, no base-to-base pathing issues, and spent quite some time on the decoration as well, so I hope for some feedback/comments about it (is it well done, how can I improve, etc).
Center of the map is mostly unbuidable, except for the expanding areas and the jungle parts. Unsure if I should make the Jungle area unbuildable as well.
So, hoping for feedback, gameplay balance-wise and/or about the aesthetic parts.
Download link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ubjz2zo1kym - Version 0.9
http://www.mediafire.com/?ymxtjj1edum - Version 0.92
|
I love the bridges! They look really awesome and are really innovative in terms of shape and asthetic.
|
wont it be hard for terren to push out since we cannot build turrets in the center =/?
|
It looks zerg favored.
Open maps and narrow choks for good sim citys (and hydras can passage through). And since the middle is pretty wide while having backdoors so it looks like a PvT and ZvP imba. Try making some spots in the middle where terran can build turrets (maybe set up a few mineral onlys in the middle)
|
I don't know if its just me, but the bottom left main looks weird. The CC to ramp distance seems much further than the other mains.
Other than that, it seems like a good standard macro map.
|
On January 07 2010 05:09 SectorX wrote:
I don't know if its just me, but the bottom left main looks weird. The CC to ramp distance seems much further than the other mains.
Other than that, it seems like a good standard macro map.
Seems the top right has this issue too
Other than that, this map looks awesome. Cant wait to try it out
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
Okay made some necessary changes, comments please!
|
Kona, I love your maps. They just look sexy.
My understanding of map balance is too low to really comment on balance, but I think it looks awesome to play on.
|
I love the way it looks. Like another said, I really like the bridges, they are different and overall it's a very pretty map. The only thing I wonder about is a Terran sieging at the third base, and hitting the natural of their opponent, is that possible? That would be tricky to stop if they were turtling, because you would have to attack into their entire third base.
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
On January 07 2010 13:37 Salv wrote:
I love the way it looks. Like another said, I really like the bridges, they are different and overall it's a very pretty map. The only thing I wonder about is a Terran sieging at the third base, and hitting the natural of their opponent, is that possible? That would be tricky to stop if they were turtling, because you would have to attack into their entire third base.
only the gas can be sieged
|
United States43962 Posts
I predict positional issues with the flash destination opening TvP taking their nat and the 12/6 (when T is 1 or 7) and then being able to tank the natural of a Protoss at 5 or 11 respectively. Even without that, 12 and 6 look a bitch to attack.
|
This looks like one of the coolest maps of yours that I've seen. 
|
I think 1 of the chokes at the 3rd for each starting location need to be widened to prevent too much zerg from having an easy time with sim city. Also I would try to break up the middle a bit, its a HUGE chunk of land and you can add water or cliffs or ramps or something there to help out TvP. I think some plateaus around the middle would help that out (terran sieges on high ground so its harder for toss to take the ground). Other then that I think its a great map and if you ever want help melee testing a map just let me know in a pm or something 
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
On January 07 2010 13:56 KwarK wrote:
I predict positional issues with the flash destination opening TvP taking their nat and the 12/6 (when T is 1 or 7) and then being able to tank the natural of a Protoss at 5 or 11 respectively. Even without that, 12 and 6 look a bitch to attack.
It requires dropships to be able to siege the natural's gas, since tanks can't get inside normally.
Have to admit, in TvP, T will have some tough time attacking/defending 12/3/6/9 expo, whereas the P can use zealots.
On January 07 2010 14:30 Whiplash wrote:
Also I would try to break up the middle a bit, its a HUGE chunk of land and you can add water or cliffs or ramps or something there to help out TvP. I think some plateaus around the middle would help that out (terran sieges on high ground so its harder for toss to take the ground).
I wanted the center of the map to be all-out huge and flat, but I'm not sure if it'll greatly cause imbalance  If there's really no choice, then I will consider adding some high grounds, but for now, not yet.
|
I like this actually. One thing I noted is in TvP is looks really easy to set up on the smaller bridges(1 o clock for example) and push a tiny bit, killing the 3rd base. There's no open area at all, so I see Protoss having a hell of a time trying to break a position like that.
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
The third (12/3/6/9) shouldn't be siege-able from center of map.
|
This looks absolutely amazing. Your concept is really cool and creative. I can't wait to throw down on this map.
Forcing small units brings up a the possibility of balance issues that would not be present on a more normal map (hurts T vs P like you mentioned, but maybe there are other considerations stemming from this feature as well).
|
I'm not positive about the map itself but let me just say that viscosity is a seriously badass name.
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
|
Looks awesome. TvP seems like its gonna be a bit of a bitch for the terran lol. Also, maybe MAYBE consider making it a little hard for zerg to sim city? Just really minor suggestions, the map looks extremly well made
|
Can't terran siege the other gas from his natural?
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
|
Your mains seem a little too spacious. The starting locations seem a little far from the nats too. Should watch the clutter you place, like the cliff-stuff on the edges of the mains, I don't think those are necessary at all. I'd rather they were either extra main space or extra walking space since the mains don't need extra space. Especially the stuff between the nats and mains, what are those for? Top left and bottom left mains are pretty different from eachother, I think you should work on your rotational symmetry a little more, and not just in the mains.
To me those bridges stick out and look ugly, regular terrain would imo look better.
Are the crystal-blocked paths tight like bluestorm nat path? If not, maybe just use terrain or a doodad to tighten the path, the crystals look out of place to me.
I think I'd either give the min onlys gas or put them on highground and give them a ramp, they seem very vulnerable for their relative lack of economic and strategic/positional worth.
I don't like the water/cliff in the middle that tightens the path out of the nat into the middle. I agree that the middle would be too open without this, but I think it feels awkward with it, that you should do something different with the middle than this. You're making main2main distances longer this way, I don't see any real reason why that would be advantageous.
Just, I think the middle needs a fair amount of thought and work. Except in corners vs corners there's little reason to use most of the middle, as all of the expansions are on the extreme sides. This differs from a similar map Tornado, where the middle is needed to use because the side-oriented paths are fairly tight and treacherous (the highground can be particularly nasty at times)
Overall the shapes of things feel awkward to me, think you could go over everything and make it more shapely. Often this means rounder. Just compare the shapes of your nats, mains, and expos with that of promaps. For example, your gas expos seem too spacious. What's the point of that excess space? It's hard to attack so it's not like players will fill the extra space with defense. They've got more than enough room to do that already, even if it was a particularly vulnerable expansion, which it isn't. Though, if the paths are tight, this just forces players to attack through drops, and extra space like that makes it more difficult to defend drops.
Kind going along with shape, I think the map is too flat. I think you need more altitudal variety.
I think decoration could be better just generally. You've just got kind of ugly splooches of different terrain here and there. I like your doodad use though, except for the mass of trees to the right of bottom left's nat.
As far as balance/gameplay go... I think the gas expos seem very awkward for z. Since they'll take nats or mains instead it probably doesn't matter, but it seems silly to make those relatively easily accessible and nearby expansions significantly less viable than the farther bases. Atleast on Fighting Spirit you have a viable choice between taking a main/nat or the gas expo first.
I don't think I like the gas expos. If you wanted tight paths, might be easier to have made them high dirt and give them 815 ramps. I don't think this encourages low tech unit use however, I think it just makes them semi-island expos that you attack by dropping.
Overall map feels like Tornado with semi-island gas expos to me. So I suppose in that sense you've succeeded in making a macro-oriented map, but I don't think that's too difficult to accomplish.
|
konadora
Singapore66359 Posts
Whoa, thanks for the huge post.
- Yeah, I've noticed I have a tenancy to use those doodads at the edge of the mains. Also, the reason why this map has a bit of difference between top left/btm right and top right/btm left is that I totally took no reference from any other maps at all. I guess this is something I should and could work on.
- Just looking at the minimap it kind of is, but in actual gameplay I didn't find it that outstanding (as ugly).
- Yes, I was thinking of how I should do that. But Temple terrain is terrible, which didn't really leave me with a lot of choices.
- High ground seems like a good idea. *nods about other parts*
It's hard to attack so it's not like players will fill the extra space with defense.
- Didn't have this in mind, so I think I'll do some re-sizing.
That was a very informative post, will take a lot of rethinking and consideration into the next version ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/6282/4viscosity092.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/7213/4viscosity090.jpg)
