|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Very impressive, G_Wen!
|
these images aren't scaling properly in the post for me 
But I really like the layout. Well done!
|
|
|
loving the (hopefully) pathable highground at the natural.
|
|
|
On November 27 2010 13:19 Steezysn0brdr wrote:
loving the (hopefully) pathable highground at the natural.
If by the pathable highground you mean this area:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BCXpM.jpg)
I hate to burst your bubble but it's not pathable. There were some tests run where the cliff was pathable and while it was a lot lot easier to deal with than on LT because roaches can hit everything up there it was incredibly difficult to go ling/baneling since you only had your queen to deal with it. I'll do some more testing with it and see how it turns out. Hopefully it'll get featured in an IMS so we can see some really high level players try to abuse it.
On November 27 2010 11:37 iGrok wrote:these images aren't scaling properly in the post for me But I really like the layout. Well done!
Gah the spoiler tags mess up the formatting. I'll replace the image with one that fits in the forum space and link it to a HQ image when I'm back home and can work on the map.
Thanks for all the support so far. If you like it try playing a few games on it! Hopefully the updated one will be up by Sunday night.
|
I was actually hoping it was pathable too.
Forcing someone to get roaches because you've gotten to tier-2.5 units doesn't seem unfair to me. This ledge seems very balanced because it is so narrow. Perhaps make it un-buildable so no missile turrets can be made on it to thwart mutas?
|
Well, you could always just use a spine crawler, which should be able to poke everything up there if you have an ovie hanging over it, if you're going ling/bling. A spine crawler's pretty standard to help against hellions anyway.
|
On November 27 2010 14:44 iGrok wrote:
I was actually hoping it was pathable too.
Forcing someone to get roaches because you've gotten to tier-2.5 units doesn't seem unfair to me. This ledge seems very balanced because it is so narrow. Perhaps make it un-buildable so no missile turrets can be made on it to thwart mutas?
On November 27 2010 15:07 hayata2.0 wrote:
Well, you could always just use a spine crawler, which should be able to poke everything up there if you have an ovie hanging over it, if you're going ling/bling. A spine crawler's pretty standard to help against hellions anyway.
Well originally the map was designed without that cliff but after zerg players complained they had no safe spots to keep an overlord the cliff was added. I'll do some more testing and see how well it plays but i spent so much time making it look nice >.>
|
This map has such a great mix of comfortable and insecure, and in a way that changes over time, it's really great. Agria Valley grown up into a beautiful butterfly. (Teasing.) :D
|
You seem to have extended the camera bounds yet you did not extend the map bounds. This looks kind of weird when you scroll to the edges of the map and see the edge of the terrain and the water floating over the blackness.
+ Show Spoiler +
Also, you may want to make it so the center path is unbuildable. You used the terrain deformation tool there to lower the terrain, but if a player builds on deformed terrain, the game kind of tries to flatten it out. Just a visual thing though.
+ Show Spoiler +
As for strategic value, I'm not sure when the rocks will ever be broken. It seems like the only advantage would be creating another attack path to the opponent's third base, but since there is another ramp right next to it, I'm not sure if taking the time to take down those rocks is worth it. It feels like the space outside of the natural and third will become an easy rally point to defend the nat, third, and fourth easily.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Gonna wait for the aesthetic update till i judge.
|
On November 27 2010 16:41 EatThePath wrote:
This map has such a great mix of comfortable and insecure, and in a way that changes over time, it's really great. Agria Valley grown up into a beautiful butterfly. (Teasing.) :D
Oh you, don't be such a tease...
On November 27 2010 22:44 BoomStevo wrote:You seem to have extended the camera bounds yet you did not extend the map bounds. This looks kind of weird when you scroll to the edges of the map and see the edge of the terrain and the water floating over the blackness. + Show Spoiler +
Going to pretend I was already going to do this in the aesthetic update.
On November 27 2010 22:44 BoomStevo wrote:Also, you may want to make it so the center path is unbuildable. You used the terrain deformation tool there to lower the terrain, but if a player builds on deformed terrain, the game kind of tries to flatten it out. Just a visual thing though. + Show Spoiler +
Fair point but I really do want the centre to be buildable. There however were no games that came up where the centre was blocked >.> I'll prob test this on sunday when I have access to my computer. I'll prob smooth out the terrain a bit as well.
On November 27 2010 22:44 BoomStevo wrote:
As for strategic value, I'm not sure when the rocks will ever be broken. It seems like the only advantage would be creating another attack path to the opponent's third base, but since there is another ramp right next to it, I'm not sure if taking the time to take down those rocks is worth it. It feels like the space outside of the natural and third will become an easy rally point to defend the nat, third, and fourth easily.
Well there are several reasons for the rocks being there:
Makes the third easier to hold.
Makes harrassment against the third harder.
Rewards holding the xel naga towers.
Allows more mobility between the third and fourth once the rocks are taken down.
When I was testing the map some protosses and terrans would take the gold as their third while zerg did not have this option. Terrans could use bunkers to hold off attacks and protoss has pylons to warp in reinforcements. Zerg however had to walk between the expansions and had a very short path to the opponents natural which did not work well for them. To make the third a little more appealing the rocks were added to deter harassment at the third. Hellions could take the very long way around and avoid the towers and sneak into the third. To make this a bit safer the rocks were added.
It also created an interesting tension between the third and gold since taking the gold meant your main was a bit safer from air harassment and colossi using that cliff into your main. The third however is easier to hold since you can rally your units in between the third and natural. In terms of economy the third and the gold will pretty much tie when both are fully saturated except Terrans can use the mules on the gold to gain a boost and the gold is a lot easier to saturate. The gold also runs out of minerals faster.
So in summary the rocks are there to make the third a more viable alternative to the gold expansion. In teseting someone mentioned that the gold and main are pretty close and a terran player could just lift off and take the gold but that hasn't happened yet.
Thanks for your feedback everyone, especially you Steve!
|
This looks great. Wish this kind of stuff was on the ladder!!!!
|
Thanks Medic, also no upgrade tonight, video card problems crash whenever an intense program is running (such as map editor or any modern video game). I'll do the update when I fix this problem, I have a spare 9400 but I don't want to use that just yet.
|
Got video card to work, minor update published, today with a larger one coming tomorrow. Will update images once after "final" update is up.
Edit: picture of 90 is up.
|
I'm diggin it man. I particularly like the placement of your Xel'Naga Towers. They don't appear to "belong" to either player--they're just in right spots to be contested equally from both sides. And I like the double-high cliffs along the center path.
I suggest you spam doodads here to prevent tanks parking there (can only hit from 1 angle by melee units):
+ Show Spoiler +
And a question. Is that platform just north of the bottom main pathable?
Edit: topdown view isn't uploaded properly. Perhaps use the Upload Image button and provide a link if you want full size.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
I want to see the tank that is able to park at a 1x1 square ...
|
On November 27 2010 22:44 BoomStevo wrote:
You seem to have extended the camera bounds yet you did not extend the map bounds. This looks kind of weird when you scroll to the edges of the map and see the edge of the terrain and the water floating over the blackness. Adding cliffs now, sigh.... the worst part of the job...
On December 01 2010 13:33 Gaius Baltar wrote:
I'm diggin it man. I particularly like the placement of your Xel'Naga Towers. They don't appear to "belong" to either player--they're just in right spots to be contested equally from both sides. And I like the double-high cliffs along the center path. Thank you.
And a question. Is that platform just north of the bottom main pathable? These areas are not pathable:
+ Show Spoiler +
On December 01 2010 17:17 dezi wrote:
I want to see the tank that is able to park at a 1x1 square ... Same this is as far up as it would go:
+ Show Spoiler +
Map would be uploaded except B.Net is failing and upload fails every time at 72%. Will try again later.
|
Given this map a few plays and it actually has a really good flow. Low ground seperation and overall design between the golds and Xel'Naga's give a nice staging ground for forward defensive strongholds early and and then later all out war occurs to secure the valley!
|
Seems almost like a 'fixed' agria valley, nice looking overall, might get around to trying it later
|
|
|
On December 02 2010 09:49 Steezysn0brdr wrote:
Given this map a few plays and it actually has a really good flow. Low ground seperation and overall design between the golds and Xel'Naga's give a nice staging ground for forward defensive strongholds early and and then later all out war occurs to secure the valley! Thanks for the feedback I'm glad you enjoy it! Did you find anything wrong with the map?
On December 02 2010 10:01 -{Cake}- wrote:
Seems almost like a 'fixed' agria valley, nice looking overall, might get around to trying it later Thanks, I don't really see the similarity between Agria Valley and Odyssey. There are plenty of differences including:
Much tighter choke at the natural and the natural protects the main.
A third base where the island is.
A central lowground path.
Different tower placements.
Central gold expansions.
+ Show Spoiler +
The textures for the lower half of the map are similar though but I find it plays differently than Agria Valley.
Edit: Wrong image used.
|
On December 02 2010 10:01 -{Cake}- wrote:
Seems almost like a 'fixed' agria valley, nice looking overall, might get around to trying it later
That's funny, I didnt' think of that at first. But I just played a game with my buddy and that is all that I could think of was that I was playing on a WAY better Agria Valley. lol
|
On December 02 2010 13:12 DomiNater wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 10:01 -{Cake}- wrote:
Seems almost like a 'fixed' agria valley, nice looking overall, might get around to trying it later That's funny, I didnt' think of that at first. But I just played a game with my buddy and that is all that I could think of was that I was playing on a WAY better Agria Valley. lol
You spawned on the bottom didn't you...
|
United States751 Posts
this map reminds me of Athena and Loki II.
Love the layout, and the sense that you can expand to the third, or take the high yeild. Whatever choice will result in different battle lines,
|
On December 02 2010 08:46 G_Wen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 17:17 dezi wrote:
I want to see the tank that is able to park at a 1x1 square ... Same this is as far up as it would go: + Show Spoiler +
I stand corrected. Still, maybe a good spot for doodad decoration in the very corners.
|
On December 02 2010 13:42 Zuan19 wrote:
this map reminds me of Athena and Loki II.
Love the layout, and the sense that you can expand to the third, or take the high yeild. Whatever choice will result in different battle lines, Fuuuuuu NMJ hates Loki II....
|
Russian Federation1132 Posts
Looks like amazing map, great work!
|
|
|
On December 03 2010 10:09 Nerfed wrote:
Looks like amazing map, great work! Thank You.
On December 03 2010 15:09 Barrin wrote:As I mentioned before I really like this map! Especially the feel of the layout in general. I just have one problem with it now though. The lowground pathway in the center of the map seems underpowered. :X I suppose with siege tanks, collosus, or air units, it can make taking the watch towers easier though. But TBH I sincerely think it would be sweet if the high yield minerals and watch towers switched places  Thanks Barrin. Originally the map did have the expos in the positions that you mentioned. (In fact the xel naga towers were on the lowground of the cliff the gold is on now). This however made the path around the map very underused so the position of the towers and expansions were reversed so the outer path can be used as a flank path.
The mid path was designed to be a very quick attack path for the early game and an extremely risky attack path for the mid/late game. The middle was originally very narrow (about half the size). This just didn't play too well in the game so the path was widened. The wider path with the old tower placement (where you couldn't see the middle with the towers) worked a little better but didn't quite have the same element of risk / tradeoff. In addition the golds could be shelled from the other side (think metalopolis).
Thus the golds and towers were switched. As a result both the towers and golds became more neutral. The towers have a more centralized position that both players can potentially hold and are more of less of equal usefulness. The golds now have a more direct attack path. (you don't need to curve around up a cliff attacking the left gold from the 6 natural).
|
The layout looks like agria valley, but with a defendable natural. the watchtower placement is great. I also really dig the use of the lighter green texture.
|
On December 02 2010 11:56 G_Wen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 09:49 Steezysn0brdr wrote:
Given this map a few plays and it actually has a really good flow. Low ground seperation and overall design between the golds and Xel'Naga's give a nice staging ground for forward defensive strongholds early and and then later all out war occurs to secure the valley! Thanks for the feedback I'm glad you enjoy it! Did you find anything wrong with the map? Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 10:01 -{Cake}- wrote:
Seems almost like a 'fixed' agria valley, nice looking overall, might get around to trying it later Thanks, I don't really see the similarity between Agria Valley and Odyssey. There are plenty of differences including: Much tighter choke at the natural and the natural protects the main. A third base where the island is. A central lowground path. Different tower placements. Central gold expansions. + Show Spoiler +The textures for the lower half of the map are similar though but I find it plays differently than Agria Valley. Edit: Wrong image used.
The only thing that stuck out to us would be to maybe push out the bounds a tad more, add a bit more water. I know there is already alot of water behind the nats and such but the camera view feels a bit crowded when you are at your main, so the dead space overall just seems to feel a bit tight to us. Also a little bit more room behind the minerals in the main was something that a few of us felt was needed, that might be solved if the bound was a smudge larger though.
Other than that everything seemed fine and played out really smoothly.
|
On December 05 2010 05:30 Steezysn0brdr wrote:
The only thing that stuck out to us would be to maybe push out the bounds a tad more, add a bit more water. I know there is already alot of water behind the nats and such but the camera view feels a bit crowded when you are at your main, so the dead space overall just seems to feel a bit tight to us. Also a little bit more room behind the minerals in the main was something that a few of us felt was needed, that might be solved if the bound was a smudge larger though.
Other than that everything seemed fine and played out really smoothly. Mhmmm I've been meaning to add cliffs and decorate them so the edges don't seem so sudden but it's a big pain to do and I haven't had much time, a lot of traveling. As for not having enough space behind your mineral lines which race do you play as?
On December 05 2010 01:34 WniO wrote:
The layout looks like agria valley, but with a defendable natural. the watchtower placement is great. I also really dig the use of the lighter green texture. Thanks, people keep mentioning it's like agria valley for some reason I don't understand. By the lighter green texture do you mean the bottom right half of the map?
|
On December 05 2010 13:53 G_Wen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2010 05:30 Steezysn0brdr wrote:
The only thing that stuck out to us would be to maybe push out the bounds a tad more, add a bit more water. I know there is already alot of water behind the nats and such but the camera view feels a bit crowded when you are at your main, so the dead space overall just seems to feel a bit tight to us. Also a little bit more room behind the minerals in the main was something that a few of us felt was needed, that might be solved if the bound was a smudge larger though.
Other than that everything seemed fine and played out really smoothly. Mhmmm I've been meaning to add cliffs and decorate them so the edges don't seem so sudden but it's a big pain to do and I haven't had much time, a lot of traveling. As for not having enough space behind your mineral lines which race do you play as? Show nested quote +On December 05 2010 01:34 WniO wrote:
The layout looks like agria valley, but with a defendable natural. the watchtower placement is great. I also really dig the use of the lighter green texture. Thanks, people keep mentioning it's like agria valley for some reason I don't understand. By the lighter green texture do you mean the bottom right half of the map?
no, i mean like the whole map has that light green grass, but you make it work. agria valleys my favorite map, i just think it resembles it a bit, in the design.
|
How many creep tumors does it take to connect the natural and main? Sorry if this has been answered somewhere else on this thread...
Nice map, I can see how it resembles Agria Valley, and how it is completely different. The main reason that it is like Agria Valley is because there are two high ground expansions somewhat in the middle of the map. The similarities end there, but that single similarity is the entire shape of the map. If the middle was different, the map would be different.
The high yield expansions on Agria Valley were on low ground for a reason. I think that your high yield bases improve that of Agria Valley's by how they are placed. They influence players to attempt to move through the middle (or on the other high ground side) to assault the high yield base so that they can get on the side with the wider ramp. Otherwise, no one would move through the middle past early game, especially with the XWTs looking over it.
I like this map a lot, nice job! 
|
I am so amused that the Agria Valley comments have continued to the chagrin of G_Wen. Antares summed it up pretty well. The other thing is that both maps have a choice of left or right high ground path, but the connection on Agria Valley is way too far for even paths, which I think are hard to pull off. The central ravine fixes this, and is a snappy feature as well--odd paths is much better in general.
I definitely agree with your explanation of the watchtowers. Nothing more to add except lol @ agria valley.
|
I am really liking the layout of this map. I have been wanting to see something like this with the long canyon running down the center and open ground above. Diggin' it!
|
it looks like a good version of agria valley
moving the islands in, less abusable main cliffs, gold minerals at the more dangerous middle expos, path in the middle of the map to move the army through... awesome job
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This map feels like a good version of blistering sands, really like that map, I'd love to play it. The unsymetric texturing is kinda sexy :-)
dont have any concerns.
|
On January 15 2011 00:07 A1m wrote:
This map feels like a good version of blistering sands, really like that map, I'd love to play it. The unsymetric texturing is kinda sexy :-)
dont have any concerns.
Thanks bro, give it a go if you can and if you find any thing wrong with the map, or if you just have feedback let me know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3PXun.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IWk7R.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/DcNHq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/BCXpM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/4xwac.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qRWkD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/0Ldux.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/88cWc.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/jFrSp.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/acXXI.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/SdjZK.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/JZzla.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/r2rKk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/T7z5Y.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UEE9T.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5apvR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/q4Sfz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TFGfB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/3/3e/Agria_Valley.jpg/400px-Agria_Valley.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AoGkm.jpg)
