Obsidian Inferno is a 2 player map named after the song "The Obsidian Conspiracy" by Nevermore. It's design is original, however when I finished the sketch I looked at it and realized immediately how much it looked like Scrap Station. I wanted to attempt to create a map designed on 45 degrees and I have not made many two player maps in the past. The design has some very experimental features and has gone through many iterations during in-house testing with the iCCup mapmaking team before today's 1.0 release. I started this project at the beginning of October and am happy to say it is finally ready for the public.
Search "iCCup" to play!
Features -Only small units may pass through the center bridge. This feature is extremely experimental and may change pending further testing. -Close air positions -Xel'Naga towers provide vision of the key high ground -Center high ground can be harassed by the cliff above -The giant rocks on the corners are flyer blockers
List of units that fit through the small bridge Terran SCV, Marine, Marauder removed in latest version, Reaper, Ghost, Hellion, Viking (landed)
Protoss Probe, Zealot, Sentry, High Templar, Dark Templar
As I said above, the map has gone through several different iterations. Here are some images from the Obsidian Inferno beta test. + Show Spoiler [Beta Test] +
Map Sketch
Beta design version 0.1
Beta design version 0.2
Beta design version 0.3
Beta design version 0.4
Beta design version 0.5
Beta design version 0.6 (and what would be the final design)
On October 27 2010 06:35 Superouman wrote: Even if it looks like crap station, the natural setup isn't retarded. I'd play your map a lot more than crap station
<3 And you can wall the ramp properly... Oh how I hate Crap Station -_-
The most interesting thing I think about this map is choosing which path to take and how you want to control the high ground center. Getting caught on the small bridge will mean that your army gets funneled out practically single-file, so being in control of the high ground center is very important~
The bridge is dangerous even for the attacker since the defender can get an uberleet concave in front of it. How big is the difference between the path through the bridge and the one via the highground? It has to be significant so the player would have to think "with my actual army, is it better to go quickly through the dangerous bridge or should i do a slower, more powerful push."
I would like to see a screenshot of the nat with the grid activated so i can see how you can do a sim-city.
On October 27 2010 06:46 Superouman wrote: The bridge is dangerous even for the attacker since the defender can get an uberleet concave in front of it. How big is the difference between the path through the bridge and the one via the highground? It has to be significant so the player would have to think "with my actual army, is it better to go quickly through the dangerous bridge or should i do a slower, more powerful push.
I would like to see a screenshot of the nat with the grid activated so i can see how you can do a sim-city.
Grid layout
With example simcity (could be improved on)
The high ground path takes a Probe almost twice as long to go around vs the short bridge. (like 1.7x - the bridge is ~25sec and the high ground path is ~38 sec, I'm about to double check this again).
EDIT: Bridge is 25sec ramp to ramp with a probe, high ground path is 37sec. Not quite double but it's still reasonable, and large units such as roaches, tanks and immortals cannot fit through the close path.
I'd guess that the bridge is only viable for early game pressure like early pool/early mnm push/fast zealot. If you like rushes it's a good feature. I don't like rushes btw.
Other than that I can't really find something to complain about right now
I was thinking of 2 things while playing...although I'm not sure how good this advice is though.
A xel'naga on the southeastern side of that bridge could be pretty cool, makes the bridge more important and could give a lot of vision in the middle of the map.
The Middle Expo...the one just northwest of the gold right in the middle of the map. I was thinking maybe I'd like it better if that expansion was a level lower rather then up a level.
/shrug.
Again not really sure if I know what I'm talking about since I haven't really played it much but hey opinions are opinions :D
I'm not home, so I can't try this: what does the pathing AI do with a fat unit and the small bridge?
Let's say you rallied your main hatchery to the other guy's base. Would "little" units take the tiny bridge and "fat" units realize they should walk the long way, or do they also try but bunch up at the tiny bridge?
The above scenario is silly, but a unit at your third base might start walking toward the short bridge when the larger path is only incrementally longer, and it might be confusing.
Okay, that aside, this map is cool (I mean, hot!) and I think the area around the third base is the right formula for exciting engagements.
On October 27 2010 07:17 dimfish wrote: I'm not home, so I can't try this: what does the pathing AI do with a fat unit and the small bridge?
Let's say you rallied your main hatchery to the other guy's base. Would "little" units take the tiny bridge and "fat" units realize they should walk the long way, or do they also try but bunch up at the tiny bridge?
The above scenario is silly, but a unit at your third base might start walking toward the short bridge when the larger path is only incrementally longer, and it might be confusing.
Okay, that aside, this map is cool (I mean, hot!) and I think the area around the third base is the right formula for exciting engagements.
If I drag a box around an army that consists of Zealots, Immortals and Sentries for example and then attack click my opponents main from my natural the Zealots and Sentries will take the shorter path while the Immortal will immediately start walking towards the longer one. This is something that players can easily compensate for by paying attention to their units, or waypointing their rally points from the base.
This problem is on the list of "things to be weary of" with the very experimental bridge. Like Superouman said, using the bridge will allow your opponent to gain the opportunity to set up a perfect concave as your units run out of the bridge single file
Also, OP has been updated with a coherent list of units that fit through the bridge. All units not on that list do not fit.
And if the bridge does turn out to encourage cheese to much, then I'd sooner put destructible debri on it then remove it entirerly. 'cause besides cheese, it's a nice path for mid/late game commando units, ghosts or some sneaky infestors or something.
On October 27 2010 07:30 burningDog wrote: I like the narrow bridge. Atleast I think I do.
Do you know when/if it's gonna be up on EU?
And if the bridge does turn out to encourage cheese to much, then I'd sooner put destructible debri on it then remove it entirerly. 'cause besides cheese, it's a nice path for mid/late game commando units, ghosts or some sneaky infestors or something.
One of the versions of the beta actually had the middle blocked by destructible debris, but in testing it was found to kind of make the bridge unusable so it was removed. Again, this is a consideration to keep in mind with the bridge. I personally do not feel as though cheese is super strong as the distance is still very reasonable and cheese being cheese, if you don't see it coming and you lose to it it's not really the map's fault, now is it?
As for an EU upload I have every intention on getting it up on EU but I may wait for further testing before I give any kind of time frame :p
On October 27 2010 07:39 prodiG wrote: As for an EU upload I have every intention on getting it up on EU but I may wait for further testing before I give any kind of time frame :p
Son of a...
In that case could you put up some detail pictures? I want to see the eye candy (the bridge in the banner looks sooo good).
On October 27 2010 07:39 prodiG wrote: As for an EU upload I have every intention on getting it up on EU but I may wait for further testing before I give any kind of time frame :p
Son of a...
In that case could you put up some detail pictures? I want to see the eye candy (the bridge in the banner looks sooo good).
Here are a bunch of completely unedited images that I just took in the map. See if you can spot where they on the map ;D
On October 27 2010 06:30 prodiG wrote: List of units that fit through the small bridge Terran SCV, Marine, Marauder, Reaper, Ghost, Hellion, Viking (landed)
On October 27 2010 06:30 prodiG wrote: List of units that fit through the small bridge Terran SCV, Marine, Marauder, Reaper, Ghost, Hellion, Viking (landed)
There needs to be a map like this without a bridge shortening the middle. I remember a few BW maps like this, but they all had the bridge. Besides, it isn't really balanced how you have it now. I can take a bunch of marauders for early pressure and FE vs a protoss at the same time because there's no chance of a stalker attack if I can backstab through the middle.
This is a great map ProdiG, I like the choked up bridge idea! This gives Zerg the option to ling run-by even towards later game, which beforehand was only possible in BW. Nice work!
I thought that you said once a week? Is it once a month now?
On October 27 2010 09:13 Antares777 wrote: This is a great map ProdiG, I like the choked up bridge idea! This gives Zerg the option to ling run-by even towards later game, which beforehand was only possible in BW. Nice work!
I thought that you said once a week? Is it once a month now?
I took a break to work on my ladder skills, and with the addition of the TeamSix Mapmaking team I'm in no hurry to be cranking out maps. I'd much rather spend a month on a map testing the hell out of it than cranking out a million new maps and say "it's good, gogo"
There's no destructible rocks or islands it seems... think that's fair and/or diverse enough?
While zerg certainly doesn't have things easy in SC2, this map seems quite favorable to zerg due to the fact that they don't ever need to destroy rocks or build nydus worms to take lots of expansions.
On October 27 2010 08:57 Shron wrote: There needs to be a map like this without a bridge shortening the middle. I remember a few BW maps like this, but they all had the bridge. Besides, it isn't really balanced how you have it now. I can take a bunch of marauders for early pressure and FE vs a protoss at the same time because there's no chance of a stalker attack if I can backstab through the middle.
This. The fact that Protoss has no ranged unit that can take the "short path" is going to be utterly detrimental in both MUs. Meanwhile, the short path into the open natural totally shuts down any Protoss FE builds, especially vs. T, where the map just screams "3rax on me please!".
On October 27 2010 10:08 hayata2.0 wrote: Yeah, sure sentries aren't ranged units. And the short path should be super easy to forcefield if only small units can fit.
A Zealot/Sentry composition is pretty good, I mean, it does decently against MM and Hydra Ling.
One Hold-Position zealot should stop early zerglings through that thin bridge.
Ok, ranged units that are actually good for killing things. Sentries are nice, but most players are getting too many of them IMO- their health and DPS is total crap, and cute forcefields will only go so far if you can't actually kill your opponent's stuff.
Also, the only way to forcefield that path in time is if your army is pretty badly out of position for guarding the other path. On this map, you'll have to guard one path or the other, or play close to the Nexus- and the distance from Nexus to "short path choke" looks pretty damn long in these pics.
The fact that marauders can walk across the bridge is insane, they are easily, along with marines the most powerful unit that can traverse the bridge. On the other hand, Protoss completely shuts down any early zerg pressure but putting 1 zealot on the bridge, but get screwed later as stalkers have to take the long way (but marauders can go short.) I realise this can't be changed as it's to do with unit sizes, but just personally I feel if it can't be balanced well, it shouldn't be on the map.
On October 27 2010 09:23 Xapti wrote: There's no destructible rocks or islands it seems... think that's fair and/or diverse enough?
While zerg certainly doesn't have things easy in SC2, this map seems quite favorable to zerg due to the fact that they don't ever need to destroy rocks or build nydus worms to take lots of expansions.
Aside from that it looks rather nice.
I am personally not a fan of either and tend to avoid them whenever possible. Island expansions are tough to do because of the fact that Terran can lift to them so easily, which makes it difficult to balance around. If you add destructible buildings blocking it, there is a decent chance the island won't be used. Also, islands are tough to place on rotational symmetry maps because you need four (or one goofy one in the center) and a lot of my maps are rotational. That said, I may include islands in my future maps.
maybe put a mineral block that requires six workers to mine out.
a command center can load five SCVs, so you need to fly back and grab a sixth, or bring a dropship like the other races need to. (otherwise you could research neosteel frame which is 100/100 like researching Overlord Drop)
Then you'll have an island which isn't terran-favoured, yet relatively easy to take once you have drop (just drop 8 workers!)
On October 27 2010 09:23 Xapti wrote: There's no destructible rocks or islands it seems... think that's fair and/or diverse enough?
While zerg certainly doesn't have things easy in SC2, this map seems quite favorable to zerg due to the fact that they don't ever need to destroy rocks or build nydus worms to take lots of expansions.
Aside from that it looks rather nice.
I am personally not a fan of either and tend to avoid them whenever possible. Island expansions are tough to do because of the fact that Terran can lift to them so easily, which makes it difficult to balance around. If you add destructible buildings blocking it, there is a decent chance the island won't be used. Also, islands are tough to place on rotational symmetry maps because you need four (or one goofy one in the center) and a lot of my maps are rotational. That said, I may include islands in my future maps.
You can just make it a semi-island on lowground with long walk distance protected by drocks. That way terran needs to scan to seige.
Monitor and I played a few games on it and the bridge leads to some pretty interesting thing in mirror matches, such as using 1 roach to block it from ling runbys ect..
On October 28 2010 06:59 TheMonkeyMon wrote: I'm skeptical of the bridge but since the rest of your work has been so exemplary I'm very excited to try it out. Downloading now.
As I've said in the OP, the design is very experimental. I want to see how the Paranoid-Android style bridge works in Starcraft 2. Experimentation is key~
I like the basic concept. Testing will have to show if marauders are overpowered early game because of bridge crossing capabilities. One thing to note however, is that Protoss can wall it off with a single forcefield. Let alone, comming out of that bridge against an opponent with a good set-up could lead you to an instant concave of death.
As I've said in the OP, the design is very experimental. I want to see how the Paranoid-Android style bridge works in Starcraft 2. Experimentation is key~
Couldn't all units cross the first bridge on Paranoid Android? The second was just to avoid chokes I thought.
I like the bridge mechanic, and the aethetic look of the map, but I seriously hope the pathing doesn't fuck over your mid to late game armies ie: you have a zealot stalker army and a-move somewhere across the map, the zealots go through the bridge and your stalkers go the other way.
On October 28 2010 13:59 Chronopolis wrote: I like the bridge mechanic, and the aethetic look of the map, but I seriously hope the pathing doesn't fuck over your mid to late game armies ie: you have a zealot stalker army and a-move somewhere across the map, the zealots go through the bridge and your stalkers go the other way.
This will happen if you try to attack move your opponent's natural or main from your own natural or main. It's pretty easy to play around, especially if you're paying attention or making sure you attack move the center first.
On October 28 2010 13:53 monitor wrote: Couldn't all units cross the first bridge on Paranoid Android? The second was just to avoid chokes I thought.
I think it's a cool map. I don't get the hate on Scrap Station though. I think Scrap Station is a really cool map, especially with the big ramp and the use of the debris at the natural, and rocks on the bridge and the close-by-air island, and the gold at the bottom with its own tower. That map is so dynamic.
Anyways, I think it'd be interesting if the high ground base in the middle were more than just standard resources. Make it something a bit more worth fighting for. There's two very natural expansions, and very few games get beyond 3-bases. Maybe make it a gold, or have like 10 mineral patches, or maybe even a 3rd geyser. It seems a bit undesirable as a 3rd base. Perhaps remove a gas from the second natural expansion? I see that it only has 6 mineral patches, that's a very cool design. But I don't think many players would try to take the middle as a 3rd unless they're already ahead.
Crap station produces very poor games in general and the main reason for that is that the real contested ground between thirds is narrow. There is no variation in the expand patterns as well. I don't see this fixed, you will have unit balls clashing at the same exact spot again and again.
I liked the version with the 3 ramps at the bottom part of the map. This just offers more options and makes the map more different to Scrap Station. Maybe just don't like the Scrap Station Style of maps ^^
What was the idea behind the large destructable rocks in "beta design version 0.1"? They're also in the sketch, and they don't seem to be blocking off the ramp so there must've being an other reason for it, right?
On October 29 2010 00:46 burningDog wrote: What was the idea behind the large destructable rocks in "beta design version 0.1"? They're also in the sketch, and they don't seem to be blocking off the ramp so there must've being an other reason for it, right?
The idea was to split that open area in two but I couldn't get the space to work out so I scrapped it.
On October 29 2010 01:19 blubbdavid wrote: reapers fit through the bridge?
Q_Q
It's not that big of a deal. Every race has the tools to effectively deal with any attack that comes through the bridge.
The problem that I see with the bridge is not with it being overpowered but instead underpowered. Once the game opens up past the early game positioning one marine or ling in the center of the bridge will nullify almost all the aggression that comes through the bridge.
Maybe the bridge can have two paths that small units can fit through instead of 1.
On October 29 2010 01:19 blubbdavid wrote: reapers fit through the bridge?
Q_Q
It's not that big of a deal. Every race has the tools to effectively deal with any attack that comes through the bridge.
The problem that I see with the bridge is not with it being overpowered but instead underpowered. Once the game opens up past the early game positioning one marine or ling in the center of the bridge will nullify almost all the aggression that comes through the bridge.
Maybe the bridge can have two paths that small units can fit through instead of 1.
The one marine or ling would surely die This is an interesting idea, I'll keep it in mind.
hey prodiG about the bridge in the center, do the units end up walking single file down it? if it does work that way you could just change the pathing at the entrances so it only allows small units to leave/enter the bridge but their pathing is unhindered on the bridge itself. ofcourse this means you could drop big units on the bridge and they could only be reached by small units (i made a map that had this feature a while ago in beta, never got around to remaking it in retail) when bnet decides to let me back on i definitely want to try this out
Further testing has shown that Marauders having the ability to move down the center but not Roaches is just not working, Marauders now interact with buildings and doodads the same way Roaches do (same size in regards to maneuvering close to buildings, but not in a ball together) and can no longer pass through the close bridge. OP has been updated with the list of units that can pass through.
Marauder Inner Radius stat 0.375 -> 0.6785 - Same as Roach This only affects buildings and doodads, not units. The difference is almost unnoticeable in-game (as in you'll only notice it if you are specifically testing before/after) and does not influence gameplay. (Tested)
Really nice map, good work. I like the idea with the thin pass. I really think this is a great map for all races... I can publish it on eu server if you want. Maybe just one thing, smooth out the edge on the ramps just for visuals.
One aspect of this map that really interests me is that high ground platform behind the center, normal expansion. You could do things like stick tanks on that platform and shell units as they leave your opponent's natural among other things. It would be cool to see people try to exploit that.
Not trying to be nitpicky, but I did find a very small imbalance on the map related to the ridge. The distance between the natural platform and the high ground platform is slightly smaller on the left side than it is on the right side. The difference is very, very small, but it's enough to be able to warp in small units like DT's, one at a time, from the platform if you have a pylon there while the other side cannot. You can also blink stalkers between the two on the left side, but not the right (though the AI can't handle it well, and some will blink down instead of on to the ridge).
Here's a couple screenshots. I can't really imagine this making a difference in a game, but I thought I'd point it out anyway.
On November 24 2010 20:37 Baby_Seal wrote: One aspect of this map that really interests me is that high ground platform behind the center, normal expansion. You could do things like stick tanks on that platform and shell units as they leave your opponent's natural among other things. It would be cool to see people try to exploit that.
Not trying to be nitpicky, but I did find a very small imbalance on the map related to the ridge. The distance between the natural platform and the high ground platform is slightly smaller on the left side than it is on the right side. The difference is very, very small, but it's enough to be able to warp in small units like DT's, one at a time, from the platform if you have a pylon there while the other side cannot. You can also blink stalkers between the two on the left side, but not the right (though the AI can't handle it well, and some will blink down instead of on to the ridge).
Here's a couple screenshots. I can't really imagine this making a difference in a game, but I thought I'd point it out anyway.
ProdiG, just want to say that I love this map as an "improved Scrap Station" sort of concept--especially with the innovation of the small-only bridge. I almost hope that the iCCup team will tackle improving every Blizzard map--if the players are going to complain about remakes of BW maps, maybe they'll enjoy non-terrible remakes of SC2 maps.
On November 25 2010 04:24 theqat wrote: ProdiG, just want to say that I love this map as an "improved Scrap Station" sort of concept--especially with the innovation of the small-only bridge. I almost hope that the iCCup team will tackle improving every Blizzard map--if the players are going to complain about remakes of BW maps, maybe they'll enjoy non-terrible remakes of SC2 maps.
Haha, I sketched a less-broken Jungle Basin yesterday. Took some elements from Destination as well, we'll see if it works out. I think Jungle Basin could be a good map if there were some key changes but time well tell~
On November 25 2010 09:19 Barrin wrote: Every expansion on this map is extremely wide open! I would say that this makes it extremely zerg favored, but it seems that by defending the area outside of your third you are effectively closing off any counterattack routes to your natural/main by ground forces. This in itself would lower "spectator value", but the fact that it's so wide open somewhat makes up for that fact by simply encouraging frontal attacks.
There is also a lot of air space around main/nat/third/4th/gold, a lot like scrap station. This encourages air/drop play which gives reason to pull some forces back from your front line further alleviating the 3-base turtle factor mentioned in the first paragraph.
I'm too lazy to check in-game.. but can you fit a building behind those LoS blockers inside the bases? If not then I recommend widening it out a little more I also think that adding some LoS Blockers in front of the third base would be a nice touch (Not really blocking off the entire path, just part of it).
The bases are tiny! But this seems to be made up for by the fact that you will need a lot of buildings outside of your base to wall off properly.
I believe the bridge is actually rather trivial as far as sneak attacks go if you simply keep it in check (which isn't hard at all for any race)... The only real use I see for it other than rushes is quicker reinforcements if you're pushing into the other person's natural. Maybe it would be a kind of funny retreat path too though :D
Air units cannot fly past the giant stacks of rocks in the corners of the map, so there's less space there than it might seem. Still enough to maneuver drops but it will take a significantly smaller number of overlords to spot all of the potential paths for example.
As for the mains, they've proven to be big enough. There's no LOS blockers on the map, however.
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/9GFZS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/48BYB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/FQDyW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/U6sQN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/eWZvb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/tQFFP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/bxKqY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Zkyz0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/bKpuL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/M0Nm4.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/qpEKj.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/aKsVU.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/XxvXT.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/BZges.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/DhIXp.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/kk16m.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/iPJVH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/pbTXn.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/DX3BT.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/9TLKg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/gWn2e.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/6SisY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/AFylM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/PFbxj.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cls8c.jpg)
maybe its not or blizzard search is failing
