EPTcustom map : Hades' Locker
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
baskerville
541 Posts
| ||
|
darklordjac
Canada2231 Posts
| ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 07:31 darklordjac wrote: Wait so a hard natural and very skinny. Basically zergs expos are very hard to get and terrans siege tanks will own everything on the ground you should never let terran get too many tanks | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
On November 09 2010 07:54 baskerville wrote: you should never let terran get too many tanks How many points are you in Diamond? | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
play only 5 hours a week or so so no diamond league why? is that relevant? | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
| ||
|
Omigawa
United States1556 Posts
I think you should at the very least open up the middle of the map, do away with some of the destructible rocks, and widen the paths. I think five Xel'Naga Towers are slightly excessive as well. Cool concept though, I just don't see it being balanced/ready for competitive play any time soon. | ||
|
-{Cake}-
United States217 Posts
I know you wanted to put all sorts of cool features in the map, but the first step would be to not have so many narrow winding paths, the second would be to encourage expanding, this opens up the possibility to use ground armies and much more strategic play I'm guessing you play terran? It probably looks like a really fun map to play on as terran, because you can put siege tanks and bunkers everywhere and laugh as the zerglings explode as they try to attack you, but, think about it from a toss or zerg point of view | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 08:21 neobowman wrote: Yeah, it sort of is. If you want to make a good map than you should be at a decent level. Not saying you should spend more time gaming, just saying that if you expect your maps to be at a good level, you have to learn the game. i respectfully disagree i intend to propose maps nothing more i do wish people would play the maps before commenting though by the by, i 've played tides of darkness, i was 13 played every rts from blizz | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 09:03 -{Cake}- wrote: I'm guessing you play terran? i play random ze only fun way to play sc2 | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
On November 09 2010 08:21 neobowman wrote: Yeah, it sort of is. If you want to make a good map than you should be at a decent level. Not saying you should spend more time gaming, just saying that if you expect your maps to be at a good level, you have to learn the game. Thats is sooo not true, there are plenty of developers who are terrible at playing their games, but making them, they are amazing. - Im sure there are people here who are not plat-diamond players, but make very good maps | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 08:25 Omigawa wrote: I think you should at the very least open up the middle of the map, do away with some of the destructible rocks, and widen the paths. I think five Xel'Naga Towers are slightly excessive as well. ... ready for competitive play any time soon. "unless they came from different directions" : my work is done then, zerg have to spread (like a swarm) ; plus the double ramp at the main favors zerg (particularly the large one) "open up the middle of the map, do away with some of the destructible rocks" : that's your job as a player, most of the rocks are 100 hp (a lone zergling can destroy 1 in 15/20 sec) "five Xel'Naga Towers are slightly excessive" : it's a trench war, so the eu is taking pictures... seriously i think it's interesting in such a large map (the bottom is exempt from them...) to be able to placate your opponent with watchers (worker or other inexpensive unit) have u tried it? | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 10:16 WniO wrote: Thats is sooo not true, there are plenty of developers who are terrible at playing their games, but making them, they are amazing. - Im sure there are people here who are not plat-diamond players, but make very good maps thank u for that hope u play my maps and have fun | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 09:03 -{Cake}- wrote: ... it is almost impossible to rush why? not because of the rocks? (they are 100hp, a decent unit will pass any blob in less than a minute) i think you can rush on it... the paths are narrow, yes, but you're suppose to move the units around and attack / retreat try it and have fun | ||
|
-{Cake}-
United States217 Posts
On November 09 2010 10:25 baskerville wrote: why? not because of the rocks? (they are 100hp, a decent unit will pass any blob in less than a minute) and have fun A minute, or even 15 seconds, which you mentioned earlier can actually be a pretty big amount of time, that's the difference between your warpgate research just finishing, and having to frantically micro until you get some warpins, and you warpgate research finishing, changing your gateways, warping in the first round of units, and chronoboosting all your gates I suggest looking at some of the other map threads, and how they label their maps with: main, nat, 3rd, 4th etc. also, the map analyzer which gives ground, air and cliff rush distances, maybe pick one of your concepts (low hp rocks, minerals, mass xelnaga) and design a more standard map around that, you can still be creative while coming up with competitive map ideas | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
On November 09 2010 10:16 WniO wrote: Thats is sooo not true, there are plenty of developers who are terrible at playing their games, but making them, they are amazing. - Im sure there are people here who are not plat-diamond players, but make very good maps Totally different issue. Take Halo for example. You don't need hand eye coordination and reaction time to make a game like that. Still, it's played competitively and yeah. Etc etc. Starcraft 2 is a game of strategy. Blizzard obviously doesn't know **** about balance but taking pro feedback, they managed to get a decently balanced game. In fact, the original Starcraft's balance was almost a fluke. Also, their maps are terrible as many people agree. That's because they don't understand the game. Take any map from any player who doesn't play at a high diamond level, I could probably point out 10 different flaws in their map. Of course, that doesn't mean people would believe me since this is TL, a high diamond player would 9/10 times, agree with the argument after playing. This map, with its huge size, lack of a natural and wide open spaces, is shit to play. If it was put in ladder, people would rage about it 10x more than Desert Oasis and Kulas Ravine combined. You gotta understand that as a lower level player, you do not know how balance works, nor what makes a good map in Starcraft 2. I won't say it's impossible for you to make a good map without being a high level player, since most mapmakers on TL are probably low level players and I don't want to shatter their hopes, but you have to get an understanding of how the game works. | ||
|
flowandebb
Canada158 Posts
May I ask what league you ARE in baskerville? I'm in gold league myself but even I can recognise imbalance on a map when I see it. | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 17:23 flowandebb wrote: As a zerg player, this map makes me weep. May I ask what league you ARE in baskerville? I'm in gold league myself but even I can recognise imbalance on a map when I see it. Oh yes ...you may ask lol if u want to test someone, u do not ask what color of hair or the count of his teeth ... u just pm that person with your game id, he'll respond by giving you his game id... and then at the convenient time, play said custom map (one of mine, them being the subject of contention and all...) i'll even take zerg every time... it's not ze size zat matters, it's what you do with it ps: i'm far from thinking that any of my maps are perfect, or even "balanced" (whatever that means) ... however, i feel that players have a ravishingly narrow understanding of the fact that their opinion (while as honorable as anybody else s) is but a lazy afterthought .. until they actually play the map ... then again i'm not diamond so i should sell my sc2 cd, i'm unworthy of having any fun with it creepers jeepers | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
you're kidding right? ze rocks are 100 hp takes one roach/zealot/marine to open ze chokes up ever heard of queuing ("control") attacks? once the high hp rocks are identified, just queue the attacks on every low hp in the right order... nah u had to be kidding "frantically", .. that's hilarious that is | ||
|
baskerville
541 Posts
On November 09 2010 13:41 neobowman wrote:Blizzard obviously doesn't know **** about balance aahh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa u sheep, u repeat everything you hear zat sounds tough i hate blizz for no lan i love blizz games, they are polished over ze years 1 game out of 1000 gets that sort of attention after their launch scbw was more balanced than sc1 and on and on ... u guys and your "balance" here goes my 2 cent : balance: termed applied only in a precise time frame with 2 opposing forces in motion that are in a standstill stand off position for instance in sc2 : "the zerg needs the first overlord and the sight advantage of overlord sight to equalize their difficulty in walling off (and the other races opportunity to wall off against them) (fair) unbalance : in sc2, term created for sloppy trend sheep followers, because they couldn't think of new strategies to deal with certain aspects of the game... (units, timings, maps, resources, minerals' placement around the main, there actually being 3 different races in the game and yadiyadiya... for instance : "the marauder should not have stim, it's imbalanced" (unfair) seriously: the three races are sooooo different... unbalance was the starting point of sc1... blizz is sort of working on putting them on equal footing at the start... but there is a HUGE amount of strategies to make them work against each other all through to tier 3 colossi vs broodlords or carrier vs broodlords or templars vs ultras (duh, dark or high?) or marine vs voidray ... too many, this is not go or chess ... as for my maps: even go so far to say (for instance) "this is a mirror only matchup map" then said map would still be potent enough to be PROPOSED so in essence, the more maps the merrier and after LIVE testing... then you can tweak and change said maps... it does not have to be balanced at the gate... nor even at all, if it works for even half of the matchups | ||
| ||
