|
![[image loading]](http://wl.filegenie.com/~konicki/kinkimapthread.jpg)
+ Show Spoiler +
- map thread here -
----------------
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iccup-tv
IMS streaming now!
-------------------
*Now an iCCup map (map can be found online by searching key word iCCup)*
Updates:
Change-log:
- chokes into nat have been standardized
- a second picture giving an impression of different textures
V1.02 *different nat choke*
+ Show Spoiler +
*jungle textures*
+ Show Spoiler +
************************************************************************************************
Hello TL,
It has been a while since I have posted anything. I've been generally just trying to touch up maps already made...
Now, I usually focus on larger 2 spawn maps to encourage longer macro orientated games. However, in SC2, with the amount of play styles that are emerging, I decided to spend some time on a map that encourages early aggression, but also allows for safe expansion.
I need to admit I am a fan of Steppes of War, casting aside its imperfections, I think the one thing it does right is encourage early aggression. What it fails at, however, is offering safe
expansion.
With that said, this is Sungsu Crossing
************************************************************************************************
Sungsu Crossing
V1.01
+ Show Spoiler +
Changelog:
+ Show Spoiler +- Patio added to main to reinforce drop play and traffic of flanks
- Overhead vision now necessary to attack units occupying Xel'naga towers from the main path.
V1.0
+ Show Spoiler +
A shorter ramp to ramp (20 Seconds), allows for quicker scouting and early aggression:
+ Show Spoiler +
However, the 3rd is more easily defended as the high ground in front of it is more suited for defensive play as the nat exit allows for easy access and spread on said high ground:
+ Show Spoiler +
Finally, flanking options to the middle and gold access are provided on both sides of the map:
+ Show Spoiler +
************************************************************************************************
Thanks for viewing and the support.
Map V1.0
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
The nat entrance might seem like a problem, maybe adding destructible rocks on the bridge closest to the ramp and getting rid that hole in the middle. Might prevent tanks shelling the nat but I'm not too sure
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Which texture set is this? It's the same prodiG used in his latest 4 player map but it really looks sweet.
|
The nat entrance might seem like a problem, maybe adding destructible rocks on the bridge closest to the ramp and getting rid that hole in the middle. Might prevent tanks shelling the nat but I'm not too sure
Tanks shelling the nat from where? The holes purpose is to divide an attaking force, or force the attacker to leave one lane open. This is generally a defensive advantage as, per your example you have a tank bio-ball outside your nat. If they decide to push in the ball must either split or choose one ally over the other. This will not win you the fight, but it does make it easier for the defensive player to obtain an arc the attacker cannot.
Which texture set is this? It's the same prodiG used in his latest 4 player map but it really looks sweet.
Yes, ive considered changing the textures for this reason... they are fun textures we really have not seen enough of, however me and ProdiG add maps to the same pool and there cannot be to much repitition. Thank you however, for the comment.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
So where did you get that textures from or did you made a custom set out of the existing ones? If so i would be nice if you could tell me which parts you used.
|
On September 11 2010 00:23 dezi wrote:
So where did you get that textures from or did you made a custom set out of the existing ones? If so i would be nice if you could tell me which parts you used.
It's the Ulaan texture set, unmodified.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Mh, gonna test this. The small texture preview pictures just don't gave me the feeling it's pure Ulaan ^^
|
On September 11 2010 01:05 dezi wrote:
Mh, gonna test this. The small texture preview pictures just don't gave me the feeling it's pure Ulaan ^^
funcmode is correct, there was not any editing to the Ulaan Textures set. I am working on a couple of other texture possibilities though and will post images later.
|
Ridges that influence the whole map layout own. i like the layout basically, but. if the total size is 128 this map is small that it hurts me.
|
On September 11 2010 02:15 Madsquare wrote:
Ridges that influence the whole map layout own. i like the layout basically, but. if the total size is 128 this map is small that it hurts me.
Map bounds are 156 wide by 128 tall, making it slightly larger than the 124*124 Steppes of War.
Remember, this is intended to promote gameplay similar to what we see on Steppes. The difference here, is that both the nat and the 3rd are more defensible.
The middle ridges are less influential than meet the eye as well. Xel'naga towers are only accessible from the lowground with ramps favoring a particular spawn. This means there is (if both players are on a similiar foot) there is always half of the map un-attended. You cannot set up in the middle like you can Steppes and maintain map control. The middle controls itself and little more, and is aggressive only towards ones nat, leaving the 3rd and gold accessible and unchecked.
|
lol I didn't see this topic and posted in your map thread about this map.
|
The watchtower placement is genius. Honestly, I feel at this stage in SC2's evolution towers are thrown around too liberally (that's ok, experiments are good), but this jumps out as a succinct example of good usage.
Here's a quick-and-dirty test that this map passes: If I have two or three bases running and I start cranking units, is there a watchtower where I will just pour my blob? If yes, then I contend it is a bad watchtower. LT fails this test, I would remove those towers, DO passes, I think the towers are well-used on that map like Sungsu Crossing.
Got carried away--konicki, nice map but yeah, the towers fired me up!
|
V1.01 added.
+ Show Spoiler +The watchtower placement is genius. Honestly, I feel at this stage in SC2's evolution towers are thrown around too liberally (that's ok, experiments are good), but this jumps out as a succinct example of good usage.
Here's a quick-and-dirty test that this map passes: If I have two or three bases running and I start cranking units, is there a watchtower where I will just pour my blob? If yes, then I contend it is a bad watchtower. LT fails this test, I would remove those towers, DO passes, I think the towers are well-used on that map like Sungsu Crossing.
Got carried away--konicki, nice map but yeah, the towers fired me up!
Thanks alot for the words, but also thanks for bringing that up. The tower placement was something that took me quite a few hours to actually figure out. I wanted bias-towers, each favoring a particular spawn.
I want to force players to pinpoint the vision bounds of their opponents tower.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
This also helps reapers alot. Before they only could get in close to the ramp, right?
|
Yes, the idea of the patio is to make reapers and any cliff-walking unit more viable, however, whether or not it stays is up in the air.
|
*updated*
- chokes into nat have been standardized
- a second picture giving an impression of different textures
*Now an iCCup map, searchable by keyword: iccup*
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Choke looks good but don't change the textures. They fit this map very good and still only NA?
|
I like the jungle textures better. Honestly, I'm just biased against dark maps--some look very slick and cool but I hate playing on them. Your darker textures for this map are definitely on the lighter side, but whatever the set for Twilight Fortress is, I puke all over it.
|
|
|
Did you switch it to the Bel'shir tile set? That seems to be the opposite of adding variety to the iCCup map pool.
|
On September 15 2010 06:44 BoomStevo wrote:
Did you switch it to the Bel'shir tile set? That seems to be the opposite of adding variety to the iCCup map pool.
I believe the jungle tileset is Aiur, not Bel'Shir. Bel'Shir is significantly brighter than Aiur
|
On September 15 2010 07:10 prodiG wrote:
I believe the jungle tileset is Aiur, not Bel'Shir. Bel'Shir is significantly brighter than Aiur
Whichever tileset it is, I like the original better.
|
My vote goes to the jungle tileset, even if it is bel'shir 
I realy like the cliffwalker patio you've aded, and I think the new natural choke will "work" beter. But I did like the old choke because it was something different.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Please keep the dark setting. I don't think the jungle setting really fits here.
|
|
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Just noticed (now that this map is on EU) that it seems you have placed sight blockers on one side of the XWT Oo
|
Yea thanks for mentioning that, the map has been uploaded to EU servers by TeToNN.
The invisible sigh blockers on the center facing side of the towers are that units in the middle cant kill a unit on the tower without overhead vision.
|
On September 16 2010 22:34 dezi wrote:
Just noticed (now that this map is on EU) that it seems you have placed sight blockers on one side of the XWT Oo
Yes this is now one of 5 maps available on the EU server.
The others are:
iCCup Sanshorn Mist
iCCup Violet Heights
iCCup Orbital Divide
iCCup River Point
|
This seems really interesting to me. It is at the same time tied with Blistering Sands from ladder pool for having least mineral fields in it, and least total minerals, yet at the same time it does look fairly macro-friendly. Natural isn't super-hard or super-easy to hold, but the third seems pretty safe. Gold is either close to the opponent's base or far away from your other expansions, I.E: Exactly where it needs to be.
The middle-bridge seems wide enough to fit some real combat on, and there are flanking options to it. The Xel'Naga Tower positions are a bit odd, though. Could we get a clearer image just how much ground they cover? Seems like they keep a lot of mid under control, really denying any surprises. It might not be that bad, though, since this map doesn't seem to be huge, so every bit of extra time to react is good.
Overall, I really like this. I also like the non-jungle textures better.
|
Amadi,
Here is an image of the Xel'naga coverage. Thanks for the comments!
+ Show Spoiler +
|
IMO the only problem is the xelnaga on each players side makes the gold actually not thaaat hard to hold. Then again it just makes it kinda like LT
|
The base positioning is genius. XWT position is also genius because units cannot mass there, like they can on LT. Metalopolis would be another great example of well placed watchtowers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/7126/sungsucrossingdiffchoke.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/9434/sungsucrossingdifftext.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/6498/sungsucrossing.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/6498/sungsucrossing.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/2017/ramptoramp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/954/3rdw.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/7881/flankgold.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/9695/sungsucrossingxelnaga.jpg)
