|
Big S-Isle
In the beginning, I just wanted to make a map that is remotely based on Xel'Nage Caverns. Then I started to change stuff, the origin is not really obvious now, the placing of the golds and the thirds is still kinda similar though.
I ended up with a map with quite a long ground distance that can be significantly shortened by destroying some rocks. Naming this one was easy, lol.
1.1 up on EU
1.1:
Removed the Xel'Naga towers, made the mains bigger, added rocks and LOS-blockers to the golds.
Also made the middle part a bit bigger and the doodads beneath the cliffs smaller to let the cliffs look higher.
90:+ Show Spoiler +
50:+ Show Spoiler +
1.0:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
I would like the blocked paths much more if the watchtowers don't cover these.
//edit
Mains look quite small and it seems that one can siege those expos in the mid?
//edit
What textures you meshed together? ^^
|
Oh my god, this actually looks like and island. I mean it's like the most realistic island-looking map I've seen, great job on the aesthetics!
|
Oh god, the map looks absolutely beautiful. I mean holy shit that looks freakin stunning. That deco is ridculously good.
Doesn't look like gameplay would be good but I'd play it just for the aesthetics.
|
Really beautiful but where do you build your base?
|
On November 08 2010 04:49 Superouman wrote:
Really beautiful but where do you build your base?
near the minerals of course. where did you thought you needed to build it?
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
He means space-wise i think because the main actually looks very tiny.
|
Extraordinary visuals!
You could easily tweak to accommodate the complaints and you'd have a winner. My personal gripe: the watchtowers seem way too secure, and provide so much security. Are they really needed? Could they be accessed from the center instead? At least adjust so they don't cover that DR side path.
On November 08 2010 04:23 neobowman wrote:
... I'd play it just for the aesthetics.
Definitely.
S stands for Serpentine right? 
|
I'm going to have to agree with everyone else here. Looks great, as usual, but the layout could use a little help. Mains are small. 5th(?) can be sieged from main. Towers oversee sneaky path. Etc.
I can tell you did the symmetry by hand. The map analyzer image highlights the differences. Especially when it labels two different Thirds for the top and bottom. It makes it look nicer (more natural) when things aren't exactly symmetrical, but watch out for micro symmetrical imbalances.
Also, I think you could come up with a better name. 
|
This map made me Happy.
Mech FTW
|
Wow, so many comments. Most of the textures are from Meinhoff, just added some grass and brown dirt.
Hm, the mains are too small, true. Can be changed. Means I have to do some detail work again, but that's not too much of a problem. I like the idea of making the watchtowers accessible from the center. Will do that.
I actually thought players would take the fifth that is closer to their own main, when the rocks are down it should be defendable.
I did the symmetry partially by hand, just mirrored a very crude basic layout.
Thanks for all the propositions, I know I still have a lot to learn, and I'll try to address these issues.
|
i like the general layout a lot, but the bases look really small.
the pathway blocked by rocks looks quite nice, but i am unsure if I'd try to take it when opponent is sieging in his own base! ios it possible to shoot down on the pathway?
|
Pretty! I like this one. I especially like the beach shore you added around the island. It gives it a natural look. Cool!
|
Great looking map! Very pretty. However, I think the game play would be kind of lacking... it seems like the first 3 expansions would be very easy to defend.
|
On November 08 2010 08:53 Moody wrote:
Great looking map! Very pretty. However, I think the game play would be kind of lacking... it seems like the first 3 expansions would be very easy to defend.
Maybe if all the watchtowers were removed altogether it would create more interesting gameplay? Looks to me like 5 siege tanks on the watchtower and the enemy can't attack period TBH.
Also, the first thing I noticed is that the bottom watchtower doesn't cover the whole hidden path. It wouldn't effect normal gameplay but you might as well fix that.
|
This is what happens when Far Cry meets SC2 Editor hehe. Looks great, your own place in the sun. But as some already said, main needs to be a bit bigger. Btw, are there sharks in the water? 
|
Beautiful map but 2 things I noticed (feel free to disagree just my 2ct).
1. Looks way to similar to xelnaga caverns shape wise and would probably end up playing in almost the exact same way. This doesn't make it a bad map, but might not do much to diversify the pool.
2. I really feel there needs to be more space between the main and the expo right north/south of it's air-only side so that tanks can't seige it and colossi can't abuse it. The reason? The map flow feels a lot like Match Point where the 1/7 expos, even tho they are right next to the enemies main, are part of your expo progression.
For example, the guy who spawns up north will take his nat and then his 3rd, working his way towards the left side of the map. His 4th base, following this progression, SHOULD be the 9 base but he can't take it against terran or toss who will just seige it up. After watching dozens of games on match point, it seems like a natural progression that works great and only adds to game tension when you have an expo so close to their base yet they can't just completely deny it from the saftey of their main. Would be a great map change imo.
TLDR: You should not be able to seige the middle expos from your main.
3. On principle you should put rocks at the golds just to avoid stupid shit like terrans lifting off and taking it at the start as well as forcing players to commit unit time to destroying them for the pay off. A gold should never be the obvious third imo (should be the one in the back in this case).
|
My eyes... I'm crying, it's beautiful...
|
I absolutely love what you did with the outer edges. Islands with straight up cliffs never look that great, so the way you eased into it like that was awesome.
|
Beautiful, the terrain is amazing.
|
Updated.
I tried replacing the Xel'Nagas, but ended up removing them. I think it's better that way. They were just too easy to abuse, no matter where the ramp was. Enlarged the mains for obvious reasons. No further comment needed on that matter.
The golds are harder to take now because of the rocks, and I also added LOS-blockers.
Btw, are there sharks in the water?
Of course.
You should not be able to seige the middle expos from your main.
I still feel like the player that spawns at the 8 should take the 9 as his 4th. When the 3 would be the logical 4th, pretty much all the expos would be way too easy to defend. With this placement he is forced to spread out a bit, taking the base that is close to the opponents gold, creating a lot of tension there. I don't know if it's good, but it feels that way.
|
I love this map, excellent placement of the golds to make them harder to maintain, long rush distances (always good), and yeah what everyone else is saying, it looks really nice.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
I thought you just want to replace the tower instead of throwing them out Oo
|
I wanted to, but I prefer it that way. If I would have left the ramp on the defenders side, the golds were more secure than I wanted them to be, and would reduce the feeling of tension the LOS-blockers may give. With the ramps to the middle, tanks would be really powerful for the attacker, making the center a bit too easy to hold.
Maybe having the ramps lead to the sides would work, but somehow I haven't thought about that before, lol.
|
it's very pretty, i love how it looks. one of the better looking maps i've ever seen :D
what i don't like, though, is the megaparsec rush distance and the fact that there is essentially only one path a ground army can take. i would like to see the ramps turned inwards and the attack path reworked so the distance isn't too long or short and there are more than one way to get to the opponent's base. just my opinion
the map looks amazing though, it's beautiful.
|
Aesthetically it's brilliant, although I personally don't like high-yield expos on high ground, too much reward for too little risk imo.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Why don't you place the towers on low ground? I don't know why you want them to be elevated.
|
|
|
On November 12 2010 05:49 unbal3 wrote:it's very pretty, i love how it looks. one of the better looking maps i've ever seen :D what i don't like, though, is the megaparsec rush distance and the fact that there is essentially only one path a ground army can take. i would like to see the ramps turned inwards and the attack path reworked so the distance isn't too long or short and there are more than one way to get to the opponent's base. just my opinion the map looks amazing though, it's beautiful.
I agree with this, the biggest problem of the map imo is that there is only one path you can take which makes it very easy for big mech armies against Zerg since flanking is so hard and it prevents counter attacking, so that you have to engage directly. Towers in the middle make it even worse, so I think removing them is a step in the right direction.
But like everyone said, the map is really beautiful
|
This map looks really great, I want to give it a whirl in game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/7A3c6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/UPnuX.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/PDg4m.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/CARaE.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/9SKlb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/nY6RC.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/gWzCD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/4mtBM.jpg)
