|
On December 20 2010 11:16 Barrin wrote:Special Thanks:TexSC + Show Spoiler +for the idea of an overlay and bringing the idea even farther into comparing .gif files. And for being the Official Nitpicker. Btw sry for not getting you to help playtest it  We still can if you want 
You are quite welcome for all of the help! I will try this out ASAP and let you know what I think. Also, I'll add you on bnet. Go ahead and add me Tex.263
p.s. You never responded to my PM
|
This looks sick indeed, I wish i had starcraft I so i could see where the map is about, As the OP is quite lacking. From what i read its a 2v2v2v2 map with infinite resources.
Oh and also - What are the zerg imbalances for this map, Siege tanks and pylons sounds great. But is zerg being left in the dark?
|
intrigue
Washington, D.C9933 Posts
think it looks great, you even got the cliffs replicated just right. call me old fashioned, but i think it's still critical to have wallins that can be done with only a depot and a barracks and 4 gasses in each main!
|
|
|
Very nice map! Due to the custom map system I dont think Ill be playing this unless its at some lan event or something. Dont think waiting in an empty lobby is plausible. I dont get why blizzard doesnt keep the create but change the join...
|
|
|
|
|
This seems awesome, there was a lot of effort put into making a good BGH here and I cannot wait to give it a shot. The old 2v2v2v2 games were the most fun playing StarCraft that we just about ever had. Thanks!
|
I absolutely love BGH (imbalances included!) and so many props for bringing it to SC2. My only gripe with it, however, is that the smiley face isn't as pronounced :D
|
|
|
On December 20 2010 11:16 Barrin wrote:
These 4 things really make it seem like 180x180 is actually just fine to me. Perhaps the biggest drawback is that the rush distances are roughly 25% longer than the original. Maybe something like 165x165 would be better overall. But really, that's the key concept here: overall. As long as we're using the sc2 format with sc2 units and sc2 mechanics, no conversions of this map will ever play quite like the original. There are several sliding scales that are independant of each other but dependant on the map size; the 4-5 I mentioned here are the most important ones. Again: I don't know; maybe 180x180 is a little too big; maybe ~165x165 would be a little better.
yeah, in redoing Wuthering Heights I ended up at 152x152. Like you say, there are different scales. I could have gone bigger based on tank range, but it started to make distances too large. Makes BW ports difficult. You probably hit on a good size for BGH. I mean who wants to rush on that map anyway 
|
This isn't posted on the EU realm yet I presume?
|
I would love to see this map on Europe server.
|
On December 20 2010 15:09 nalgene wrote:most sc2 maps are 128x128 and they are considered "small" but 128x128 is good enough for Benzene/Fighting Spirit but for sc2, that would probably be much bigger than 128x128 http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/korean/maps/407_Benzeneimage there
That's a misconception. The standart SC2 maps are in fact bigger than it says on Liquipedia (tried to change it once, didn't work for some reason). Maps like Metalopolis or LT are actually around 140x140 and still don't feel really big.
Btw. trying to upload on EU since I just can't find a good version on there.
|
I've been waiting for a proper BGH port. High fives all around!
|
|
|
wow, look like a TON of work went into making this as faithful a reproduction as possible. major props, i'll be looking forward to playing this
|
Fantastic job. Add me for some games.
Cheeznuklz.805
|
|
|
tested it last night, nice work..
not a fan of the lighting and fog of war, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
