EPTLots of small chances and it looks much nicer now.
I tested it with two friend. We thought it played really nice.
Vertical spawns are pretty aggressive but its all good.
Tell me what you think!
[M] Divided Solution - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Corak
Germany187 Posts
Lots of small chances and it looks much nicer now. I tested it with two friend. We thought it played really nice. Vertical spawns are pretty aggressive but its all good. Tell me what you think! | ||
|
Sirion
131 Posts
The map structure really works quite well. This outer ring of expansions, with mains more in the middle, and the horizontal and vertical spoke-like attack paths. What I especially like is how spawning positions change the play on the map, but somehow a lot still is the same: -In horizontal or vertical positions, the way along the ring is the clear route of attack, with a tower to control vision. The spokes provide alternative paths, with longer walking distance but more secrecy. Also, this ring structure allows to expand either towards your opponent or away from him. -In cross positions the distances become big, but close air distances keep the threat of aggression present and the game dynamic. Also, suddenly it is no longer clear from where an attack is coming, so the longer walking distance is balanced by the need to keep track of where opposing forces are positioned to not get caught out of position. -Close air distances certainly play an important role, but by it seems not too difficult to protect main, natural and a third from air harass, as a well protected main constricts the air access to the expansions behind it a lot. -As it is mirror symmetric and not rotational symmetric no player has an unfair advantage just through spawns, both players have identical access to expansions and attack paths. So regarding overall map layout, it seems like a great blend of the good features of both metalopolis and desert oasis. Regarding the finer structures of the map, I like how the natural is protecting the main, while simultaneously pointing away from the opponent regardless of spawns. Given the threat of air harass, that is an important feature (and the reason the original desert oasis failed). Also, the empty space at various parts in the middle restring cliff hopping paths are a nice touch. I am torn on those alternative paths from third to natural in vertical spawns. On one hand, that little cliff there might provide an additional defends advantage, on the other hand an additional attack path in positions where you already have the closest walking distance might be too much. I guess it comes down whether it is more of an a defenders advantage or attackers advantage. The way some the minerals of the thirds in horizontal positions are attackable from the vertical middle path is nice, but I do not know if that makes that expansion too vulnerable. But given how a lot of expansions are available that seems fine, if you do not like that one take a different one. It also rewards map control and awareness, in contrast to massing a big army and a-moving. I am no terran player, so it is tough to judge the size of the main to put down a lot of production buildings without exposing them to attacks from the low ground(siege, colossus, broodlords). Overall balance seems good, with each race having some features they like and some they do not like so much. Regarding aesthetics, the map has nothing special going for it, it is no beautiful garden or mystic shrine, it is a derelict space station. However, I have no objects as it looks and feels a lot like that, some derelict station floating somewhere in space. Nobody cares what its former function was, now you fight over it because it gives positional advantage to whoever controls it in some bigger conflict. I like how it is easy to construct this kind of story from visuals alone. Which brings me to my biggest point of critique: the name "Divided Solution". It evokes nothing of the story the aesthetics tell. Any other name, say "Station 426", would be better. So in conclusion, after a post which grew much longer than I had planned, I like this map. It is fun to play on it. It gives opportunity for a lot of play styles without forcing any, creating exciting games. Some details might(or might not) need some changes, but that needs a ton of play testing to figure out, by many different players. And in the end, if my biggest complaint is the name, then it is a fine map and deserves more attention than it is currently getting. GL in MotM #5. | ||
| ||
