| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
monkh
United Kingdom568 Posts
- Having less mineral nodes for an expansion - Mixing high yields with normal mineral nodes - Mineral only expansions with no gas - I was considering aoe dmg effects in areas of map clearly visable (f.e. like over heating generator i would put maybe high templar psi storm effects around the generator make it dmg units near it. Another example could be larva lakes could walk through but dmg units) anything ive not put on list that definitely shouldn't be in melee map? | ||
|
asdfiprod
United States34 Posts
| ||
|
tompliss
France21 Posts
I'm new here, and have a question about melee maps : I've made one, filling the requirements to be a melee map (as map status tells me), I published it, but when I host it, I can't select "melee" style to play it ... So it force me to create teams myself (just boring), and I can't open it to public (I don't even know if this could be possible anyway...). Any solution ? PS: sorry about posting it in here, but I've been searching for a whole day before coming here, and can't create a topci yet ... | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
When in doubt, ask yourself "why is that the way it is?" If you can't come up with a suitable answer, it's time to rethink whether that unique aspect is really needed, or if there were a different way it could be incorporated. On a general note I would like to see more original maps and less BW maps. There's nothing wrong with BW maps of course, but I think Blizzard maps have made people think that anything other than the original BW maps are inferior. No, only Blizz maps are inferior  Don't be afraid to try something new imo | ||
|
PaterSin
Germany301 Posts
On May 23 2010 08:05 monkh wrote: I've been playing about with creating melee maps and I am curious what;s communitys thoughts on various map designs small specific things like - Having less mineral nodes for an expansion - Mixing high yields with normal mineral nodes - Mineral only expansions with no gas - I was considering aoe dmg effects in areas of map clearly visable (f.e. like over heating generator i would put maybe high templar psi storm effects around the generator make it dmg units near it. Another example could be larva lakes could walk through but dmg units) anything ive not put on list that definitely shouldn't be in melee map? -less mineral nodes in an expansion seems not so good would make you think twice about expanding there, it would take less workers but u'll get a lot less out of it unlike high yield. -mixing them seems interesting give it a try I guess -no gas is also interesting but I'd do that on high yield to make it worth it -last point seems a bit unfair for zerg. terran bringing medivacs+scv's and protoss only taking shield dmg. Zerg would have more of a disadvantage imo | ||
|
Nightmarjoo
United States3360 Posts
I don't think mineral only bases will work well in this game, but I definitely could be wrong. I just feel like gas is too precious in sc2. | ||
Falling
Canada11465 Posts
| ||
|
tompliss
France21 Posts
It prevents drops and air-harass too easily, for no reason ... If you are on an island and can't be attacked from north because it's the border of the map, it's kind of weird ... | ||
|
Bswhunter
Australia954 Posts
| ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On May 30 2010 19:21 Bswhunter wrote: How about making a high yield mineral field directly between the players in a 1v1 that they have to fight over. We kind of have that in scrap station and incineration zone. The former is used more as a hidden expo and the latter taken only when you have the game won anyway. The viability of such a thing really depends, but if it is right on the path, then it'll be taken only when you have the game won for all practical purposes...except for maybe TvT. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
Having "true bridges" where you can go under the bridge too. | ||
|
tompliss
France21 Posts
The game doesn't handle multi Z-level platforms ... | ||
|
Gibybo
United States229 Posts
On May 30 2010 21:39 tompliss wrote: You can't make "true bridges" ... The game doesn't handle multy Z-level platforms ... There is something the map editor can't do? *gasp* | ||
|
tompliss
France21 Posts
I've made a map, filling the requirements to be a melee map (as map status tells me), I published it, but when I host it, I can't select "melee" style to play it ... so, no answers ?  | ||
|
monitor
United States2408 Posts
| ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
| ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
* Expanding more requires more map control and opens up new directions of attack, making it harder to defend. * No ridiculously tight choke-points in the middle of the map (that at the very least can't be circumvented by rocks) that would just screw up some matchups (too Protoss-friendly) * No naturals that are ridiculously easy to defend (too Zerg-friendly) * Not too many high-ground death zones, or very close, easily-defended gold minerals to starting locations (too Terran-friendly) You want a nice mix of things that are friendly, and unfriendly, to each race. | ||
|
Merikh
United States918 Posts
I also think all maps don't need to have high ground advantage at their main. Kulas is a good example of open ramp (no ramp) except the natural is hard to secure. Maybe more maps with safer naturals, harder to secure thirds. Bigger is better :D | ||
|
Crazyeyes
Canada1342 Posts
| ||
|
Satallgeese
United States239 Posts
On June 14 2010 04:50 Crazyeyes wrote: What does everyone think about gas-only expansions? :O Man crazyeyes, you crazy. Thats just silly. Those would seem too easy to snipe, because they wouldn't be worth it to defend because of less workers and, overall, less income. | ||
|
Iwbhs
United States195 Posts
| ||
|
Yung
United States727 Posts
| ||
|
Trozz
Canada3456 Posts
My map is so nonstandard. Nothing wrong with that. | ||
|
Morayfire73
United States298 Posts
| ||
|
t3tsubo
Canada682 Posts
| ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
On June 14 2010 04:50 Crazyeyes wrote: What does everyone think about gas-only expansions? :O You would have to make gas high demand, maybe your starting/natural geysers wouldn't have so much in them so that a gas only expo would be worth taking | ||
|
MenacingVitamin
United States50 Posts
Don't shoot ideas down just because they might not fit with the way game play is right now and don't base judgments on current flavor-of-the-month strategy. Open your mind; get out of the box. | ||
|
MenacingVitamin
United States50 Posts
On June 14 2010 09:51 t3tsubo wrote: how about minerals and gas that are far away in the same expo so you have to choose whether to have more efficient gas miner or more efficient mineral mining based on where you build your CC? Ooooh I like this too. Another offshoot would be to maybe construct expansions so that players would have to place their command centers/hatcheries/nexus further away from the resources, forcing longer-range mining and more emphasis on protection of supply lines. | ||
|
WhistlingMtn
United States190 Posts
| ||
|
GreatestThreat
United States631 Posts
Okay might as well keep going and spout some random thoughts here, the ideas are flowing: Maps with bases that have no actual chokepoints but are surrounded by an almost complete wall of destructible rocks. Island maps with high ground plateaus and a sprawling low ground area instead of water/lava, just brimming with high yield minerals. No ramps anywhere. Maps with extra minerals in the main locked behind destructible rocks. Maps wracked by intermittent storms that deal damage to air units which aren't sheltered over specific areas. A map that starts out as an island map with a sea between the two players bases, that slowly recedes over time revealing lower and lower tiers of cliff that meet in the middle at the bottom as the tide goes out. A map completely spiderwebbed with LoS blocking doodads and a heavy amount of watchtowers. Perhaps overlap with the air-damaging storms for really intense scouting play. Urban warfare maps with towering destructible buildings that can be knocked down to block off roads, dealing AoE damage when they collapse. A map that starts out as open jungle with a volcano in the middle that erupts and sends lava streaming out in a few directions. Forest fires that deal AoE to ground slowly spread from the lava rivers and only stop when they reach barren/rocky ground like near the mains/expos. Scavenger desert maps with very little resources in the bases, but have certain ruined pockets that can be "captured" to give you an immediate lump sum of minerals and gas. Trench warfare maps with neutral "structures" of some sort, that can be loaded and fired out of like bunkers by any player. Also, mutually hostile minefields instead of destructible rocks. Cannon fodder units have to be sent through to clear them out or you can avoid them with detection and blink/drops/nydus. LoS blockers that prevent air from seeing ground and vice versa, but not air from seeing air or ground from seeing ground. Deep rivers that can be traversed by massive ground units, but not normal sized ones. Also, tank trap areas that only small units like marines/zealots/zerglings/workers can fit through. Patches of thick mud or quicksand that slow down any unit crossing it. I'll come up with more, let me know what you think... | ||
|
Crazyeyes
Canada1342 Posts
ne could even create a map with like double the expansion points with half the minerals at each one. Insanely awesome possibilities in gameplay styles imo. I think that's awesome. Would love this. I also think that having to choose between optimal gas and optimal minerals, or anything like that, could be very interesting. and all the 'not normal' ideas that GreatestThreat posted make me super excited for future SC2 maps. Shit's going to get pretty crazy ;D | ||
|
t3tsubo
Canada682 Posts
| ||
|
Ndugu
United States1078 Posts
Starcraft II needs more risk/reward. Want a quick march into your opponents main, in exchange for your units losing 20% of their health to get there and 20% again if they need to retreat? Particularly if it could be coded that units wouldn't normally choose to path through it unless told specifically. Could be very cool aesthetically as well. | ||
|
monitor
United States2408 Posts
I suggest making a map with a bunch of interesting ideas and labeling it "test map"  | ||
|
RageOverdose
United States690 Posts
I think that the focus on gas only expos is not a bad idea. Really, because of how important gas is with all the spell casters costing insane amounts of gas and the necessity of getting 2 geysers held with 6 workers each, have a difficult-to-hold rich geyser only expo with few or no minerals. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  46732Jaedong  3530BeSt 722EffOrt 714Mini 621ggaemo 603actioN 518Stork 509Shuttle 425ZerO 411[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games FrodaN5681 singsing2178 Liquid`RaSZi1369 B2W.Neo1224 Fuzer  243crisheroes142 KnowMe112 Mew2King52 ZerO(Twitch)19 Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
BSL
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Calm
Royal vs Mind
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs PianO
Flash vs Speed
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
