EPT[M] (4) Axis of Industry - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Amadi
Finland139 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On September 22 2010 07:10 Amadi wrote: That image clears a lot up. I think it's quite allright after seeing that picture.  Also, Axis of Industry is available on the Europe server thanks to d4d! | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
| ||
|
Gionight
Russian Federation8 Posts
Here's some screenshots http://yfrog.com/n6capturebop http://yfrog.com/n8capture1tp http://yfrog.com/mycapture3pp http://yfrog.com/j7capture4ukp http://yfrog.com/2ccapture5p http://yfrog.com/nbcapture6zp and here's actually map : http://sc2.nibbits.com/maps/project/76042/axis-of-industry you will not regret to try it but you need beastly fast PC to run it properly cos of so much details i added in your map. | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On October 12 2010 16:25 Gionight wrote: Hello dimfish , i made modification on your map without you permission i hope you don't mind that i post it on nibbits it was my first map and i liked your overall design. Here's some screenshots http://yfrog.com/n6capturebop http://yfrog.com/n8capture1tp http://yfrog.com/mycapture3pp http://yfrog.com/j7capture4ukp http://yfrog.com/2ccapture5p http://yfrog.com/nbcapture6zp and here's actually map : http://sc2.nibbits.com/maps/project/76042/axis-of-industry you will not regret to try it but you need beastly fast PC to run it properly cos of so much details i added in your map. Is your Bnet ID RaiNmAker or something like that? I did see someone had modified it. I don't mind that you made your own version, and I'm very glad that you posted here to say so, that's cool of you. Maybe in the published map description you could credit me as the original author? Also, glad you like the map! | ||
|
Gionight
Russian Federation8 Posts
Sorry for my bad English it's not my native language | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On October 13 2010 23:57 Gionight wrote: I'm not RaiNmAker or something like that sorry about this I did credit you as much as i could if you read description under the headline there you could see all the details, appreciate your loyalty about your map. I was glade to see your response , but you did't wrote your thoughts about my mod of your map (good or bad) you should try it if you have good enough PC. I think it's the one of the most beautiful maps (of course with your help to found this map) for this game, i tried too many empty and ugly maps to start make them by myself . Cheers Sorry for my bad English it's not my native language You're right, I didn't check it out but I just opened it and you were not kidding about going to town on this map, it's turned into Alice in Wonderland! And your computer must be a beast--my editor went into lowest graphics automatically! I really like the dance party going on at the south of the 2 o'clock base, that's awesome My only suggestion is to try and get the look you're going for with less lights and doodads, otherwise a lot less people will be able to enjoy your hard work | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
Devotion by prodiG would be an excellent example of a map that is literally too awesome for most computers. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On September 22 2010 05:24 dimfish wrote: OneFiereceZealot: I added this little section to the OP; do you still think that? Comparison to Lost Temple Posters have voiced concerns that the close spawns on this map are too close together, or that in cross-spawns a Terran player can easily turtle at the choke between close spawns and happily take five bases. These concerns are valid, a good map should not have any spawns too close or allow too many bases to be easily protected. However, I believe this image comparing Axis of Industry to Lost Temple shows that, on a 1-to-1 scale, the maps have similar close-spawns with plenty of space in between for army movement. Consider this: what can a tank/turret blob on Axis of Industry do that the same blob cannot at the watchtower on Lost Temple? ![[image loading]](http://static.curseforge.net/thumbman/images/25/498/600x328/Compare-LT-AoI.png.-m1.png) Your argument, while mostly accurate, contains one fallacy: it assumes that close positions on LT are balanced and a good thing. To the contrary, they turn games into 2base play max because being able to safely take a third means you've already won. Boring as anything. If I wanted to see games on small, constrictive maps I'd watch games on Incineration Zone. I would do what Blizzard did for Shakuras Plateau and make close positions unspawnable. | ||
|
hayata2.0
Canada655 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
I don't agree that close spawns on LT are boring. Why can't you take a third base? You can put up a hidden expo early or take an island or establish map control and grab the far high-yield. If you mean that these games are shorter on average because the players are up in each other's face (relative to other spawn distances) then how is this any different than close spawns on Metalopolis (which is even closer in close spawns)? In any case, the image comparison was primarily meant to address concerns that the spawns were close in terms of having a single choke between them and the center of the map, meaning a Terran could position all of his defenses in one spot to protect his main+nat+another main+another nat. This is not exactly trivial on LT and I'm arguing that on LT you have a watchtower to help, so its not a problem on Axis of Industry either. @hayata2.0: Yes, 2v2 allies spawn together in the close positions, and I agree a fun part about "rectangular" 4 player maps is that there are 3 different rush distances among spawn possibilities! | ||
|
ricky88
Malaysia109 Posts
Part 2 Map used was VISTA Axis of Industry R. Played in VISTA Lasik 1v1 Semi Finals between GLaDe and Azz vs Australia. Map is available in US and SEA server. More about the tournament here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=132597 | ||
|
darklordjac
Canada2231 Posts
| ||
|
ricky88
Malaysia109 Posts
VISTA Lasik Semi Finals: G1: RiseN vs Renson Pt 2 Map used was VISTA Axis of Industry R. Played in VISTA Lasik 1v1 Semi Finals between GLaDe and Azz vs Australia. Map is available in US and SEA server. More about the tournament here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=132597 | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
TeacHMeToWiN
United States9 Posts
The concept behind the map is pretty cool, however there are a few design flaws that make this map completely unplayable. My biggest problem with this map is the fact a Terran player can fully siege any main from the third natural. I do mean fully siege, you can kill the hatch/nexus/cc from the low ground. The rest if just nitpicking and personal preference. | ||
|
ForayeR
Brazil34 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On October 25 2010 23:55 ForayeR wrote: You have to increanse the area of the main.. terran can siege everything from the third... On October 25 2010 23:35 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: My biggest problem with this map is the fact a Terran player can fully siege any main from the third natural. I do mean fully siege, you can kill the hatch/nexus/cc from the low ground. Wow, that is a huge flaw, I will work out a fix right away. Thanks for posting On October 25 2010 23:35 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: The concept behind the map is pretty cool, however there are a few design flaws that make this map completely unplayable. [...] The rest if just nitpicking and personal preference. As long as I'm going in to make changes, what are your other comments? I'd like to hear your criticisms. | ||
|
TeacHMeToWiN
United States9 Posts
Back in the 2v2 Ladder days... (SC/BW) For those that played yes I am }{º£¥TûéR and I miss IGL greatly~ The most popular maps was Temple / The Hunters / and a sprinkle of Dire Straights I'm a huge fan of all three because each brings a completely different play style needed to dominate. In this version of your map a player has no real incentive to maintain map control. My expansion + gold expansion is behind, so some strong turtle strats present itself and timing pushes. Please take my criticism with a grain of salt, because I am not a map maker nor do I have concepts of how how difficult it would be to implement. ~ Fixes for 2v2 ~ I would make map slightly bigger I would move ramp in front of base (this would fix the siege issue and the keep walk times solid) I would make 3rd expands Gold (not the one in the back of base) I would add a Tower in mid, or two towers 1 bottom mid 1 top mid. (Give players some advantage for holding middle) Downside to this? Zergs would complain they can't fast expand as easily and would be a pain in the ass to spread creep. My favorite 2s maps to date in sc2 Tarsonis Assult Monlyth Ridge Lost Temple (wish someone would make a 2s version of this map the current version just doesn't work for 2s) Scorched Haven (If they would make it slightly harder to block choke, just a tiny bit wider) | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
I've got some responses for you, and for sure I'm going to fix the size of the mains to prevent siege tanks from hitting the main building. On October 26 2010 02:42 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: Well I like to have multiple play styles... I like to have the threat to rush, the threat to macro, and I love having a huge penalty for not being able to have map control. I'm a huge fan of all three because each brings a completely different play style needed to dominate. I want to defend Axis of Industry on this point, because I think it can live up what you said (siege problem aside). Maybe you could tell me why you disagree? I think this map has rush potential because, even though the rush distance is somewhat far, if you get to the space in between the teammate bases its easy to keep them cut apart. Other 2's maps generally have the team ramps very close together. Do you think this is true? On October 26 2010 02:42 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: In this version of your map a player has no real incentive to maintain map control. My expansion + gold expansion is behind, so some strong turtle strats present itself and timing pushes. I think you agree with me that this map has macro potential, and from your comments you think that it is too easy macro hard, because of the gold base. I'll come back to that point in just a second. Also, I VERY VERY MUCH agree that map control should give you a big advantage! Every map I make has this in mind. On Axis of Industry I put the signature 3-gas expansions in the middle because I think if you get map control you should take the 3-gas base next to your main. With 3-gas you can upgrade a lot or get higher tech faster than with a normal expo. So what do you do against a team that tries to turtle up with their mains, nats and the gold? I think drop play is really strong on this map, but I haven't gotten a replay or VOD of high level players trying it yet. I meant for the edge of the main to be attackable from the low ground (but obviously not the main building!) so a turtle has to have defenses at the really big choke AND in their main, where on Lost Temple ground armies cannot attack nearly as much of the main from the low ground. Also, if you notice there is a bunch of unpathable high ground all around the natural and the gold base--drops can fly in right over these bases and attack! If you deny the turtle air sight then you can literally fly up really close before they can spot it. I think players trying to turtle up can be punished with probing attacks at the main choke, attacks on the main from low ground and drops coming at the back bases--if they have enough stuff to defend everywhere then theyre not really macroing up. The perimeter is really long, so find a hole and punish. Do you agree? If not, drop some knowledge on me! On October 26 2010 02:42 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: ~ Fixes for 2v2 ~ I would make map slightly bigger I would move ramp in front of base (this would fix the siege issue and the keep walk times solid) I would make 3rd expands Gold (not the one in the back of base) I'll be honest, I'm not going to make these changes. For sure I won't make it any bigger or flip the ramps because it will become almost a different map at that point. I think I see what you're going for by switching the center expos to gold, but I hesitate on this one too. To do this I think the current gold should become blue and no rocks and the center expos become gold. It's a possibility, but I think the expos are good as is, because the rocks take time to destroy so that's one more incentive to get in the center earlier. On October 26 2010 02:42 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: I would add a Tower in mid, or two towers 1 bottom mid 1 top mid. (Give players some advantage for holding middle) I've discussed this issue in several other threads, it's just a personal preference of mine as a map maker. I don't like using watchtowers a lot because when they are misused they make for lazy games. I think the towers on Lost Temple are bad because they say, "Hey, just rally all units here." And you can with good vision and your units are safe and holding an important center location. This does not take skill! So the gap between good and players gets closed a bit. On Axis of Industry I designed the center first. It's long and skinny and with no towers, because a good player should be able to out-maneuver a weaker player there. Good players should spread creep for vision and hide overlords on the little cliffs, or put a viking on patrol to spot attacks and siege up to use the gaps between the dotted cliff line as funnels, or spread the toss death ball out to prevent a flank since the center is so wide. Do you agree that the valuable expansions are enough of an advantage for gaining map control, and that this map rewards good players by not having watch towers that make it a no-brainer where to concentrate your army? If not, I'd really like to hear your thoughts! On October 26 2010 02:42 TeacHMeToWiN wrote: My favorite 2s maps to date in sc2 Tarsonis Assult Monlyth Ridge Lost Temple (wish someone would make a 2s version of this map the current version just doesn't work for 2s) Scorched Haven (If they would make it slightly harder to block choke, just a tiny bit wider) This is an awesome comment, thank you! I will consider what is good about these maps when I do future designs. | ||
| ||
