|
|
|
saw my handle. i was interested
aha. reminds me of andromeda for some reason
:D
|
On June 16 2010 06:36 DreaM)XeRO wrote:
saw my handle. i was interested
aha. reminds me of andromeda for some reason
:D
The mains are a lot like Andromeda 
...i should update the OP with that!
EDIT: updated~
|
Very nice work. My only suggestion would be to make the naturals a bit bigger other than that me likey. I never liked minerals right in the middle of any map because most of the time they are never taken. It's pointless really. ;/
Metropolis had parallel expos and it worked unlike the rest. I don't see it working here either. This would make a great 1v1 map.
|
I like this one. Really need to start dabbling in the map editor some more -.-
|
I think the gold minerals in the middle are a waste, I'm not really sure how you'd ever be able to take them.
I'm also a little unsure about the layout. 1v1 with vertical placements mean there really isn't much for expansion opportunities past your natural which could create imbalances. On the other hand Horizontal or cross positions gives you crazy expansion opportunities and you can cover up to 6 bases with only 2 relatively close ground chokes. I suppose the horizontal isn't a terribly big issue, but I think vertical placements might have problems.
|
On June 16 2010 06:50 Logo wrote:
I think the gold minerals in the middle are a waste, I'm not really sure how you'd ever be able to take them.
I'm also a little unsure about the layout. 1v1 with vertical placements mean there really isn't much for expansion opportunities past your natural which could create imbalances. On the other hand Horizontal or cross positions gives you crazy expansion opportunities and you can cover up to 6 bases with only 2 relatively close ground chokes.
There are plenty of opportunities to expand no matter which way you spawn. You just have to think outside the box and take them <:D
|
At a first glance seems there is so little space to build stuff.
I would like the map was a little more open.
|
On June 16 2010 06:55 fabiano wrote:
At a first glance seems there is so little space to build stuff.
I would like the map was a little more open.
The mains are actually a bit bigger than your average map :O
|
this map looks great! i would remove the middle minerals and make the expansions beside middle gold though. This gives a little more space for the map and gives more value for those hard to defend expansions.
|
Really looks like you put a lot of work into the design; artistically speaking it looks amazing. I really can't say much about balance as I'm not that good, but since it seems so similar in many ways to Metalopolis (by design) I doubt it's much less balanced than that.
|
The thirds will be a lot more difficult to defend than on metropolis, the path to them is a bit convoluted (not sure how this would play out though).
|
|
|
prodiG keeps making awesome maps :D nice work dude!
One thing though, are there no geysers at the middle gold?
|
On June 16 2010 10:13 Subversion wrote:
prodiG keeps making awesome maps :D nice work dude!
One thing though, are there no geysers at the middle gold?
Nope, I wanted to keep it mineral only.
|
Hey man, I really like this map! While this doesn't matter to most, I do like that it is aesthetically pleasing and the visuals have a touch of professionalism. As for the functionality of the map, I'm not really in a position to comment because I am not terribly good at the game itself. I agree with some of the others that the high-yield minerals in the middle of the map will be difficult to take, but I don't think that that merits their removal - the reward is clearly worth the risk if the expansion can be held, and the fact that there is only one high-yield mineral expansion means that it is worth controlling, even if you aren't mining at it. Therefore, in my somewhat naive opinion, I think the placement of the high-yield expansion is cool and interesting, and overall, the map is definitely one of the best community-designed levels that I've seen so far. Keep up the good work!
|
I like that this map is everything that Metalopolis isn't. It feels a lot more constricted, easier to lock down expos, naturals aren't nearly as vulnerable. Looks great, can't wait to play it. =)
|
I love it. The set-up of the main/natural is extremely pleasing to the eye, and depending on how the players spawn in relation to one another this could be a map of very diverse games.
|
Looks really good, the X in the middle reminds me of X-Men :D
|
Pretty impressive texture work
|
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I think I've spent longer doodad'ing this map than any of my other ones~
|
dear blizzard,
for ladder session 1 just use all the maps prodiG has made so far for the 1v1 map pool.
thank you
|
On June 16 2010 12:51 jamesr12 wrote:
dear blizzard,
for ladder session 1 just use all the maps prodiG has made so far for the 1v1 map pool.
thank you
Dear Blizzard,
Give me more than five slots to upload maps to. Damn straight I'm going to make more than five. T_T
(I'll probably upload any extra maps on a friend's account or something)
|
Wow, middle with 10 gold minerals and no gas? Very odd. But I do like the idea of destructible vision tower. That's a cool gimmick.
But otherwise, very pretty. Mains are kinda huge, though.
|
prodiG you've done it again, man. This map seriously looks like a really, really fun 2v2 map with good potential for some excellent macro-oriented 1v1 play. I may be speaking prematurely here, but I think I'd like to see this map get some use in our iCCup TV events. =)
|
On June 16 2010 13:44 JoshSuth wrote:
prodiG you've done it again, man. This map seriously looks like a really, really fun 2v2 map with good potential for some excellent macro-oriented 1v1 play. I may be speaking prematurely here, but I think I'd like to see this map get some use in our iCCup TV events. =)
If you do end up using it, let me know. I'd love to see it played by some high-level players. I've only personally played it against some of the downloadable AI and I haven't found any outstanding or game-breaking problems with the map, but it's understandably hard to have a good game against AI that loses to my first push or AI that cheats and rapes me with a 40 unit ball of roach hydra muta in 8 minutes
I hope all of my future projects are received as well as this one! I plan on finishing Redemption next.
|
Looks really nice, though for a macro oriented map a third expansion is going to be hard to take, especially if you spawn directly across from each other.
|
On June 16 2010 13:20 prodiG wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2010 12:51 jamesr12 wrote:
dear blizzard,
for ladder session 1 just use all the maps prodiG has made so far for the 1v1 map pool.
thank you Dear Blizzard, Give me more than five slots to upload maps to. Damn straight I'm going to make more than five. T_T (I'll probably upload any extra maps on a friend's account or something)
I'll gladly give my five slots away if you keep making good maps 
|
I think this is the best-looking map I've seen so far.
The only comment I really have on what I feel could be improved is:
-The path from any base to any other base seems very choked in some places where it shouldn't be. It would be pretty easy to block someone in I feel. If you look at the highest elevation area in the middle, possibly consider widening (via a slant? to keep the X theme?) the areas immediately above the upper ramps and below the lower ramps. I think this would solve the problem. I like that the elevation dips low for the contested middle grounds.
Great-looking map though.
|
On June 17 2010 00:39 mlbrandow wrote:
I think this is the best-looking map I've seen so far.
The only comment I really have on what I feel could be improved is:
-The path from any base to any other base seems very choked in some places where it shouldn't be. It would be pretty easy to block someone in I feel. If you look at the highest elevation area in the middle, possibly consider widening (via a slant? to keep the X theme?) the areas immediately above the upper ramps and below the lower ramps. I think this would solve the problem. I like that the elevation dips low for the contested middle grounds.
Great-looking map though.
When I designed the map, I wanted it to punish you for sitting in your base for too long, which would result in some aggression being necessary if you wanted to keep up with a good opponent. I think it works well, but I'll keep your suggestion/any other suggestions in mind once I can actually test the map 
|
The map looks great, can't wait to download it.
|
Great to see another prodiG map. This guy knows how to make balanced maps, unlike 99% of the other stuff we see in the map section (rambles on about impossible to defend naturals and mains with 2 unblocked entrances).
|
looks like a really cool map, can't wait to try it out in some practice games when the beta is back!
|
is it possible to have cars going around the track and if you have your units inthe middle of the track when when the cars come by they can get hit and die? that would be awesome
|
On June 20 2010 05:58 Challe wrote:
is it possible to have cars going around the track and if you have your units inthe middle of the track when when the cars come by they can get hit and die? that would be awesome
+1, imperative for a good melee map experience
|
On June 20 2010 05:49 Whiplash wrote:
Great to see another prodiG map. This guy knows how to make balanced maps, unlike 99% of the other stuff we see in the map section (rambles on about impossible to defend naturals and mains with 2 unblocked entrances).
I *think* they're balanced. Time will tell
Not enough people are using drops or ferrying units around in sc2 so that's my excuse for everything
|
|
|
i really like it, but i must admit not liking the no gas expansion. feel thats the reason i always have to expand!
|
On June 21 2010 16:06 Subversion wrote:
i really like it, but i must admit not liking the no gas expansion. feel thats the reason i always have to expand!
The only base with no gas is the one in the middle :o
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 16 2010 06:50 Logo wrote:
I think the gold minerals in the middle are a waste, I'm not really sure how you'd ever be able to take them.
I'm also a little unsure about the layout. 1v1 with vertical placements mean there really isn't much for expansion opportunities past your natural which could create imbalances. On the other hand Horizontal or cross positions gives you crazy expansion opportunities and you can cover up to 6 bases with only 2 relatively close ground chokes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are plenty of opportunities to expand no matter which way you spawn. You just have to think outside the box and take them <:D
I think you should really take into consideration the criticism on the high yield. A 4 play map with 1 high yield containing no gas? Sure there are pleanty of other expansions to take, but at what point of the game does a player have a decision to make a pivotal move for a dangerous high yeild. Simple enough 1 hy for 4 players with no gas...ATLEAST add gas. Outside of that; I really appreciate the main//natural. Large base with alot of room for great drop harrass on both main and natural. However, I feel uncomforable with such tight travel lanes. Gains way to terran mech imo. Not much opportunity for flanking which makes Zerg ground Bantha Fodder. Against a turtling terran I see it being even more of a nightmare with the Main/Natural in comparison to the lane sizes. A siege tank on the ledge of the main is in range to shred units all the way to the next expansions ramp. I like the general cosmetics of the map but I would suggest amplifying the size of the map giving more room in the lanes. All in all thanks for the thread. Good Luck, I hope you submit more.
|
I would do a much more open center, and that high ground around the center expansion is really really scary, definitely would see a lot of siege abuse on this map, and mobility would be favored (Terran), keep in mind that
|
On June 21 2010 16:13 Christmastaflex wrote:Show nested quote +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 16 2010 06:50 Logo wrote:
I think the gold minerals in the middle are a waste, I'm not really sure how you'd ever be able to take them.
I'm also a little unsure about the layout. 1v1 with vertical placements mean there really isn't much for expansion opportunities past your natural which could create imbalances. On the other hand Horizontal or cross positions gives you crazy expansion opportunities and you can cover up to 6 bases with only 2 relatively close ground chokes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Show nested quote +There are plenty of opportunities to expand no matter which way you spawn. You just have to think outside the box and take them <:D I think you should really take into consideration the criticism on the high yield. A 4 play map with 1 high yield containing no gas? Sure there are pleanty of other expansions to take, but at what point of the game does a player have a decision to make a pivotal move for a dangerous high yeild. Simple enough 1 hy for 4 players with no gas...ATLEAST add gas. Outside of that; I really appreciate the main//natural. Large base with alot of room for great drop harrass on both main and natural. However, I feel uncomforable with such tight travel lanes. Gains way to terran mech imo. Not much opportunity for flanking which makes Zerg ground Bantha Fodder. Against a turtling terran I see it being even more of a nightmare with the Main/Natural in comparison to the lane sizes. A siege tank on the ledge of the main is in range to shred units all the way to the next expansions ramp. I like the general cosmetics of the map but I would suggest amplifying the size of the map giving more room in the lanes. All in all thanks for the thread. Good Luck, I hope you submit more.
I'll consider the high yield, but not before sufficient testing. With ten patches, it still nets you WAY more minerals than any other base on the map and controlling that base and saturating it will put you at a significant advantage.
As for the travel lanes, they're just about as wide as anything you'd see on Metalopolis, which was heaven for Zergs. If Zergs want to set up elaborate flanks, they can get overlords and nydus works and drop them on the other side of the map. Mindless 1a2a3a will get you killed, and that's the way I designed it. Against a turtling terran, you need to pull out every trick in the book. Take the 10 patch gold expansion and every other base on the map and harass the christ out of the terran if he wants to park himself in his nat and do nothing. I'll stop here, because that particular topic tends to just piss me off and I don't want to look like an angry troll
Finally, a Siege Tank on the ledge of the main can hit units running into the nat... What map can they NOT do that on?
|
prodiG.
If your tarmac is still showing up under the road and you want to fix it, it is just a doodad I believe.
Drag a selection box around it in the doodad palette, then hit enter.
There should be a box on the second row of values for Height. Add a small amount to that value until it appears just above the road.
I'm unsure but you might have to click "OK" at the bottom to make the changes show up in the main window. I think adding +0.1 or 0.2 height should be enough. But I'd have to see really.
Hope this helps if you still care about it
|
Although you're trying to 'punish' someone for staying in base too long, they pretty much have to against T and P, because you're looking at someone dropping sieges/colossi at your main to fire on your nat.
It also looks like zerg might be a bit uncomfortable on this map, There's no expansion I'd particularly want to take as my third.
Finally, I think whoever gets a fast contain off first will win here. Maybe the main could use a back door or something, but right now, it looks so easy to just trap someone against two of the more obvious awful defender's arcs (right outside the bent ramp, and above/below the natural, where you're about to spill into the center of the map.).
|
On June 21 2010 16:58 stimtokolos wrote:prodiG. If your tarmac is still showing up under the road and you want to fix it, it is just a doodad I believe. Drag a selection box around it in the doodad palette, then hit enter. There should be a box on the second row of values for Height. Add a small amount to that value until it appears just above the road. I'm unsure but you might have to click "OK" at the bottom to make the changes show up in the main window. I think adding +0.1 or 0.2 height should be enough. But I'd have to see really. Hope this helps if you still care about it
Every time I change the value, all of the other tarmacs go back under the road. According to the guys in #sc2mapster, the actor is bugged and I guess I'm just going to have to wait for a beta phase 2 patch to fix it ;_;
|
Very pretty map, looks fun to play as well but expos besides the nat look hard to hold unless you have superior map presence.
|
this map looks like a blast to play on. Cant wait for beta to be back:
 When is beta coming back up? End of june? or no date yet?
|
On June 22 2010 00:18 prodiG wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2010 16:58 stimtokolos wrote:prodiG. If your tarmac is still showing up under the road and you want to fix it, it is just a doodad I believe. Drag a selection box around it in the doodad palette, then hit enter. There should be a box on the second row of values for Height. Add a small amount to that value until it appears just above the road. I'm unsure but you might have to click "OK" at the bottom to make the changes show up in the main window. I think adding +0.1 or 0.2 height should be enough. But I'd have to see really. Hope this helps if you still care about it Every time I change the value, all of the other tarmacs go back under the road. According to the guys in #sc2mapster, the actor is bugged and I guess I'm just going to have to wait for a beta phase 2 patch to fix it ;_;
That sucks, I just toyed around to see if I could fix it with my limited skills.
As it turns out I cannot.
|
On June 22 2010 01:12 stimtokolos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2010 00:18 prodiG wrote:On June 21 2010 16:58 stimtokolos wrote:prodiG. If your tarmac is still showing up under the road and you want to fix it, it is just a doodad I believe. Drag a selection box around it in the doodad palette, then hit enter. There should be a box on the second row of values for Height. Add a small amount to that value until it appears just above the road. I'm unsure but you might have to click "OK" at the bottom to make the changes show up in the main window. I think adding +0.1 or 0.2 height should be enough. But I'd have to see really. Hope this helps if you still care about it Every time I change the value, all of the other tarmacs go back under the road. According to the guys in #sc2mapster, the actor is bugged and I guess I'm just going to have to wait for a beta phase 2 patch to fix it ;_; That sucks, I just toyed around to see if I could fix it with my limited skills. As it turns out I cannot.
Yeah, it and some of the decal doodad actors are bugged and act wierd like this. What I really don't understand is why it works fine on Metalopolis but not anywhere else...
|
Don;t like the gold mineral base in the middle and I think the watch towers should be moved so they don't see 2 bases.
|
On June 22 2010 10:16 prodiG wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2010 01:12 stimtokolos wrote:On June 22 2010 00:18 prodiG wrote:On June 21 2010 16:58 stimtokolos wrote:prodiG. If your tarmac is still showing up under the road and you want to fix it, it is just a doodad I believe. Drag a selection box around it in the doodad palette, then hit enter. There should be a box on the second row of values for Height. Add a small amount to that value until it appears just above the road. I'm unsure but you might have to click "OK" at the bottom to make the changes show up in the main window. I think adding +0.1 or 0.2 height should be enough. But I'd have to see really. Hope this helps if you still care about it Every time I change the value, all of the other tarmacs go back under the road. According to the guys in #sc2mapster, the actor is bugged and I guess I'm just going to have to wait for a beta phase 2 patch to fix it ;_; That sucks, I just toyed around to see if I could fix it with my limited skills. As it turns out I cannot. Yeah, it and some of the decal doodad actors are bugged and act wierd like this. What I really don't understand is why it works fine on Metalopolis but not anywhere else...
On Metalopolis the roads don't actually pass under the tarmacs. They terminate neatly at the edge and in the gap the tarmac appears. Them making the map like this could be a reason for them missing the bugged actors in testing.
If you change it to be like this, make sure you know that holding control while are about to lay a point of road makes it so that it won't join to previous road.
I'm not a huge fan of the road system as is. Really wish when you hit escape, then selected a 'point' that the road has placed, you could alter the X-Y coordinates of the point. As it stands it opens up a window where you can't change anything. I'm a bit obsessive about things being EXACTLY where I want them though.
E: You're probably aware of this, but there is a link somewhere in the "Remodel a Blizzard Map" contest or whatever they called it to all the melee map files if you're looking for something liek a reference. I wish I could rotate mineral patches to be honest. Maybe I'll make a custom unit.
|
On June 22 2010 11:26 stimtokolos wrote:
On Metalopolis the roads don't actually pass under the tarmacs. They terminate neatly at the edge and in the gap the tarmac appears. Them making the map like this could be a reason for them missing the bugged actors in testing.
If you change it to be like this, make sure you know that holding control while are about to lay a point of road makes it so that it won't join to previous road.
I'm not a huge fan of the road system as is. Really wish when you hit escape, then selected a 'point' that the road has placed, you could alter the X-Y coordinates of the point. As it stands it opens up a window where you can't change anything. I'm a bit obsessive about things being EXACTLY where I want them though.
This was actually the next thing I was going to try, even though it's pretty irritating.
On June 22 2010 11:26 stimtokolos wrote:
E: You're probably aware of this, but there is a link somewhere in the "Remodel a Blizzard Map" contest or whatever they called it to all the melee map files if you're looking for something liek a reference. I wish I could rotate mineral patches to be honest. Maybe I'll make a custom unit.
I have them all, I've entered "Neo Metalopolis" into the contest, you can see it in my map thread (shameless self promotion!)
|
Yeah I've been following your map thread. I like that you seem to actually think about a map before just making some random terrain.
I'm holding out on posting the map I've been working on until beta comes back up. There is already a huge quantity of maps on here I'd rather just wait until it can be actually play tested.
I'm also feeling lazy and don't want to have to fix the textures now that I've modified the terrain a bunch. I'll do it eventually.
|
On June 22 2010 11:50 stimtokolos wrote:Yeah I've been following your map thread. I like that you seem to actually think about a map before just making some random terrain. I'm holding out on posting the map I've been working on until beta comes back up. There is already a huge quantity of maps on here I'd rather just wait until it can be actually play tested. I'm also feeling lazy and don't want to have to fix the textures now that I've modified the terrain a bunch. I'll do it eventually.
I'm pseudo-testing against GreenTea AI just to kill some time, but I'm only going to expose map bugs, not huge imbalances like this.
|
On June 21 2010 16:31 prodiG wrote:
With ten patches, it still nets you WAY more minerals than any other base on the map and controlling that base and saturating it will put you at a significant advantage.
Do you have to be a pioneer? Sure it feels good to be innovative and creative, but your innovation for this map comes from a print of Metalopolis. TWO High Yields. I think you missed the point. I asked how do you respond to someone taking gold. Spend twice as much cash to import a synonymous amount. I'm not sure how much you play but your conclusion to my suggestion of Terran sided map is a little off in my opinion. However that's apples and oranges.
On June 21 2010 16:31 prodiG wrote:
Finally, a Siege Tank on the ledge of the main can hit units running into the nat... What map can they NOT do that on?
I think you have to be deliberately making a statement of that sort. I said about a Siege tank shooting units on the 3rd expansions ramp. Not that natural. Which I haven't downloaded the map and it's a rough estimate, but I believe siege would PROBABLY hit units on the ramp of the 3rd expo. Again going back to the lane situation. It seems like if you want to flank, you would have to travel through expansions on the map. Between the constant differential in high/low ground moving large forces would appear to be problematic. We won't know until we jump on the map and see for ourselves though.
ALL OF THIS CAN BE IRRELEVANT IF YOU CHOOSE. It's your map, I respect your dedication to complete and courage to release it to the public. However when you do so, you subject yourself to criticism. I try and make it constructive as well. Have a good one. Keep them coming.
|
On June 22 2010 13:18 Christmastaflex wrote:
Do you have to be a pioneer? Sure it feels good to be innovative and creative, but your innovation for this map comes from a print of Metalopolis. TWO High Yields. I think you missed the point. I asked how do you respond to someone taking gold. Spend twice as much cash to import a synonymous amount. I'm not sure how much you play but your conclusion to my suggestion of Terran sided map is a little off in my opinion. However that's apples and oranges.
Actually, the more I test it vs AI the more I am tempted to drop it to 8 patches and add a pair of geysers. I definitely don't get the idea the base is worth the investment unless it's 30 minutes into the game. Like I said, testing testing testing
On June 22 2010 13:18 Christmastaflex wrote:
I think you have to be deliberately making a statement of that sort. I said about a Siege tank shooting units on the 3rd expansions ramp. Not that natural. Which I haven't downloaded the map and it's a rough estimate, but I believe siege would PROBABLY hit units on the ramp of the 3rd expo. Again going back to the lane situation. It seems like if you want to flank, you would have to travel through expansions on the map. Between the constant differential in high/low ground moving large forces would appear to be problematic. We won't know until we jump on the map and see for ourselves though.
I've tried, it's very far out of range. The farthest a tank can reach is into the connection of the nat to the middle area.
On June 22 2010 13:18 Christmastaflex wrote:
ALL OF THIS CAN BE IRRELEVANT IF YOU CHOOSE. It's your map, I respect your dedication to complete and courage to release it to the public. However when you do so, you subject yourself to criticism. I try and make it constructive as well. Have a good one. Keep them coming.
Fair enough, I didn't mean to sound so harsh. I tend to get over-defensive when I hear anything that remotely sounds like "terran/tanks are op on this map!" because I see it everywhere and simply believe that the only reason people are struggling with them is because they're responding to the threat wrong, but that's a completely different discussion (and one that's been discussed to death in like a 50 page thread elsewhere) and I don't need to beat a dead horse. Time will tell, and if tanks are truly overpowered they'll get fixed.
|
Some new screenshots!
Hopefully some tourneys pick this one up so I can fill in the tourney box :D
+ Show Spoiler [Load Screen] +Load Screen image![[image loading]](http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/7095/groundxeroloadscreencop.jpg) In-Game![[image loading]](http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9081/sc22010062712411147.jpg)
+ Show Spoiler [Middle Area] +Cannot place building, tower being attacked![[image loading]](http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7578/sc22010062712462291.jpg) Building new command center, vision is gone![[image loading]](http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/2305/sc22010062712473874.jpg)
You'll notice that I axed two more patches and added a pair of geysers. Hopefully that makes this expansion more interesting
|
Terran turtle in the middle > all.
|
I really like this map. A++.
|
Updated the changelog:
Version 1.1
-Fixed destructible tower
-Removed 2 mineral patches, added 2 geysers to center
-Removed broken Terran Tarmac doodads from intersections. Will re-add in later patch if the actors get fixed (they're bugged, apparently.)
-Added custom load screen
-Added trees blocking the edge of the middle facing the low-ground expansions under it. Units will have a harder time shooting down those expansions.
-Debating switching low-ground expansions to the other side of that area, just under the watchtower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/641/forumheadera.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3561/easytotakenat.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/7350/sc2editor20100615153809.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/8343/watchtowerat3rd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/5411/outerarea.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/3750/terrantarmacundertheroa.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/1963/groundzerohalftextured.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/5436/sc2editor20100613221448.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/595/groundzeroterrainv01.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i49.tinypic.com/t8krwm.jpg)
