[map] Aphareus (2)

On April 26 2010 04:46 flamewheel91 wrote:
I like it, but perhaps put resources at 3 and 9 o'clock? It feels a bit stymied in terms of expansions, and it would be very hard to defend a third with this setup.

On April 26 2010 04:53 Shouryu wrote:
I think it would be better if you swapped the gold expo with the nearest blue mineral expo ('cause it looks more wide and open --> harder to defend).

On April 26 2010 04:50 GoDannY wrote:
I am wondering if the mineral placement is fine, looks like the side patches require a longer way don't they?

On April 26 2010 04:45 btlyger wrote:
Whats the size of the map?? 128x128? Overall I like it, it seems very open though, I think a few cliffs here and there would improve it a bit. Also are you using any of the new shrubbery stuff?

On April 26 2010 06:50 3FFA wrote:
I have looked at the mains more carefully after snausages' second post about it and realized he is right. Just make the mains a little bit bigger. Other than that great job!

On April 26 2010 10:03 mmp wrote:
Looks cool. I especially like the abundance of water with those two large inlets north to south. That said, you have a lot of empty space on the edges that could be filled, and space with no purpose isn't such a great thing. Why not expand the middle for greater maneuverability?

On April 26 2010 14:27 Ryuu314 wrote:
too much water. enlarge the map. use more of the space! more stuff is (almost) always better.

only problem I have with this map is that the thirds are hard to get. If you take a expo at the 2 or 7 o'clock non-gold patches they are rather far from you main, while the ones at 3 and 9 are very hard to defend. The gold mineral patches are actually easier to defend! The makes the map more Zerg favored I think because they have the easiest time securing an expo. However, it's not a bad map and it seems pretty balanced.

On April 26 2010 14:30 mity wrote:


Please clarify, the gold minerals are actually the hardest to defend and in the most open area, they also have rocks protecting them which makes them harder to secure.

Edit: I'm going to bed because its 1:45am here in EST, I will check the thread tomorrow.

On April 26 2010 17:09 ZlaSHeR wrote:
christ it looks like steppes of war without the brush and moving the 12/6 places to 3/9 lol...and no destructible rocks

On April 26 2010 16:03 Kuzmorgo wrote:
EDIT: I just realized the placement of the watch towers are such that they would give sight of the middle, but still i think the one who takes middle first, would be in a huge advantage.

On April 26 2010 14:19 mity wrote:
I added the first version, Aphareus 1.0.0 to the OP.

Any suggestions, and thanks for all the feedback, a special thanks to 3FFA who kept this thread alive. =P

The middle doodad got grayed out when I exported the image, so just ignore that for now.

Edit: The high yield expo has 1 rich geyser that gives off extra gas per trip instead of 2 regular geysers.

On April 27 2010 11:29 3FFA wrote:
LOL, are people sooooo obsessed with getting beta that they can't help with making a map that is already better than blizzard's?


edit: well, I try -.- I guess this (4th?) time I have lost my 3 strikes and people are no longer affected by my bumps=(

Anyways, make sure you sell this because it is pro map making material(probably korean material too)

On April 27 2010 16:11 Badred wrote:
This map is pretty neat. The only thing I'd be concerned about is that it seems like because of how far apart the nat, 3rd, and 4th/rich expos are, control of the middle would end up being the deciding factor in nearly every game. Whoever had map control over the high central ground there would be able to launch attacks over the other side of the map that their opponent would be extremely hard pressed to defend against. For example: attack their top expo with a medium force, then when their army is out of position, attack the bottom. Because the run distance is so long, they'd be hard pressed to defend both areas. It may stifle (or on the flip-side encourage) innovation since control over that area basically gives you free rein of your opponent's side of the map.

As far as general design, texturing and so forth go, though, it's top notch. Good job!

On April 28 2010 00:14 ADAM.1 wrote:
Nice map bro - I think the simplicity (along with the great textures) make this map great. A+

On April 28 2010 04:54 3FFA wrote:

This man said everything I did about this map in only one line! Great job man! Maybe my english skills are getting to me and now I'm starting to describe everything and I don't even know it!

On topic: I just really like this map mibz(I can't go to the page before so I'm saying your name from memory so sorry if I got it wrong)and I do think that its worth paying at least $10 for. Maybe put in some doodads in the water and then it will be worth the money but other than that great map and I think you should message me when SCII is finally out and you have your map up for download so I can put it to the final test "playability". GL and HF with any more maps you create(Please more!).

On June 01 2010 08:15 Pablols wrote:
i really like this map :D

On June 15 2010 07:10 monitor wrote:
I think this would have a really fun feel to it. Really my only two suggestions are to make the scenery a bit more intriguing and to widen the choke to the expansions at the 3 o' clock and 9 o' clock positions. This way terran mech is a bit more balanced playing zerg. Really cool map though!!!

On June 18 2010 07:11 3FFA wrote:
It looks almost the same to me. I can't see a difference at all from the pictures you posted.

The zerg is completely contained. In this situation, the zerg player is SCREWED for ground armies, except for nydus. I think you need to add a secondary path from the natural, to make contains harder.

On April 26 2010 06:23 Snausages wrote:
The mains are still pretty small.