Mutas will rape the naturals with no mercy...no space for turrets behind the mins. ):

Also...it might be something you were going for with the map, but I don't like the placement of the ramps for each of the mains...it's so close to the outside that it'll be hard to block off, especially for a forge expanding toss.

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 00:01 GMT

#44

Should I move up the minerals a bit?

Protoss can go 1 gate -> FE depending on Zerg's position

Saracen

United States5139 Posts

May 14 2009 00:05 GMT

#45

On May 14 2009 09:01 konadora wrote:
Should I move up the minerals a bit?

Protoss can go 1 gate -> FE depending on Zerg's position

even if they can do that, i don't think it's a good idea to restrict options for any race

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 00:06 GMT

#46

Mm... how should I position the ramps then? Or move the nat a bit further ahead?

Or maybe tighten the choke? Remove the creep colony? Or both?

Actually I'm interested in playing on this for balance checks. Anyone?

Oh snap, web doesn't cast and I forgot to stack minerals.

Nightmarjoo

United States3360 Posts

May 14 2009 00:54 GMT

#47

Jesus christ it's a whole new map :O

I'd be surprised if those dwebs both work and don't crash the map ._.

Despite a lot of these changes being similar to or exactly what I suggested, I'm not sure I like how this version has turned out. I dunno ._. Just a bizzare and radical jump from what you had before.

There's a lot of little things that could be fixed. I don't really want to list all of them atm, but if you want me to I can try to do it later.

I'm just not sure this is the map you had wanted to make, it's just so different from the version I commented on lol.

I think it might be productive if instead of spending a lot of time on one map, if you just kept making new maps to help you practice, and to help you learn all the little things every mapper picks up. If you don't plan on being a serious mapper then this obviously is a waste of time, but then at the same time if you don't plan on being a serious mapper it's not really important to perfect this map/concept anyway.

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 01:01 GMT

#48

I just wanted to try a new concept map, but the expo positioning was baaaaaad.

Trying to get the last d-web to work rofl, the rest work fine (copy pasted from Hwangsangbyul rofl)

What do you think is the greatest change?

>_______<

THE D-WEBS DON'T WORK, THEY KEEP GOING HAYWIRE >_<

I'll just remove the d-webs rofl

Maybe I remove the 6 and 12 and replace it with a connected like the older map?

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 01:24 GMT

#49

Okay I changed 6 and 12 a bit, how about now?

Nightmarjoo

United States3360 Posts

May 14 2009 01:33 GMT

#50

lol that's not what I meant. But let me say first of all don't let me dictate what you do with your map, it is your map. Bare in mind that ultimately only you know what the map you want to make looks like, and anything I say will be biased by what I want the map to look like, or something like that.

Mostly though, it's the whole Andromeda heavy macro thing that's weird to me. When I said "more normal expo layout" I just had in mind 4 base per player stuff, with islands on top of that or something. That doesn't mean you should hand out the money for free (the min only).

I think the map needs to be more normalized though, more standard main/nat to start off with. I think that however the concept turns out you should still use fairly normal shapes, sizes, distances, proportions, etc. You might need to alter the symmetry. Rotational symmetry is almost always superior to this kind of symmetry in 4 player maps. You're using up a lot of space on what I think are needless facets. But I dunno =/ Can you explain to me exactly what you want in the map? What are the most important features? What do you like or dislike about the map? I think if we start there we can do more with the map.

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 01:39 GMT

#51

Was thinking of early game battles if same side of the wall, if not mid-late game macro fights.

Also was thinking of creating a map design that will go for heavy late-game harassment.

All these while adding in a few experimental concepts (neutral-building-covered gas, d-web, colonies)

Musoeun

United States4324 Posts

May 14 2009 03:53 GMT

#52

I'm looking at the map, and the only way you'll actually get a fast game is if both spawn either left or right side. Anything else there's a bunch of buildings in the way.

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 03:56 GMT

#53

Playing PvZ.. wow damn it's hard.

Jayme

United States5866 Posts

May 14 2009 04:33 GMT

#54

On May 14 2009 12:53 Musoeun wrote:
I'm looking at the map, and the only way you'll actually get a fast game is if both spawn either left or right side. Anything else there's a bunch of buildings in the way.

I believe that's entirely the point...

konadora

Singapore66364 Posts

May 14 2009 04:42 GMT

#55

Results of playing PvZ:

WAYYYYYYY TOO HARD for Protoss to get FE safely (because of early creep colony). I think if I remove that it shouldn't be a problem.
Maybe I need to replace the Chrysalis with something else with more HP.