|
|
|
Cool map, I love how you placed the geysers for the thirds, and their overall location is in an interesting area. I like how the hexagon decals are not all the same color and vary the way that you set it up. This map is truly unique. The title set is also pretty spectacular.
|
On February 07 2011 10:50 Antares777 wrote:Cool map, I love how you placed the geysers for the thirds, and their overall location is in an interesting area. I like how the hexagon decals are not all the same color and vary the way that you set it up. This map is truly unique. The title set is also pretty spectacular.
Thanks!
I added the mineral and gas count for expansions at the bottom of the OP.
|
Looks good, for the amount of things on the map however I think it should be a bit bigger. Looks kinda cramped and you can siege the backdoor expo etc.
Nice job overall.
|
i think the xel naga towers arent needed, they may prove too much aid for some players, i also fear there is no real way a zerg player can effectivley scout his oppoment early game past poking front.
anyone up for testing?
|
On February 07 2011 11:27 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
i think the xel naga towers arent needed, they may prove too much aid for some players, i also fear there is no real way a zerg player can effectivley scout his oppoment early game past poking front.
anyone up for testing?
Yah, scouting is always an issue with backdoor naturals. This one won't be however, because you can spot it very easily with an overlord, which was intentional-- you can also harass easily.
In an earlier build, there were no towers. I'm still debating too.
|
well i got game hosted no1 so far to join, a game or 2 and can give the map a little more feel
tibblesevilc 604 :D
|
On February 07 2011 11:31 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
well i got game hosted no1 so far to join, a game or 2 and can give the map a little more feel
Try asking/inviting people from chat channels like "obs", or "koth", or "TLkoth", or "iccup". That should work!
|
well there a king of the hill on allready confused., take this chat to private and dele these post? so it doesn't clutter thread?
|
Neat map! I like that you're using new ideas. Experimenting is top notch.
I remember seeing a thread on the subject of using geysers to block pathing. I guess it struck a chord with you. Nice implementation!
I agree with whoever said the map looks a little small. On the other hand, maybe it's just right. Only testing will tell.
|
Hey cool map, pretty interesting and I see some really cool strategies/concepts with this  Unique gas wall thingy haha.
Thanks for making!
Just gonna throw this out, have you considered making the very middle a raised area? (higher than the natural areas, aka 3 stories)
|
a map like this, with rotaional symmetry only needs 1 xelnaga tower in the dead center of the map, having those 4 xel nagas is a bit overkill and really allows you to control the map almost too well. Basically I feel like xelnaga towers should never really overlap each other, and there is no way to balance out the towers without removing them and putting just 1 in the center like Delta Quadrant. Just my 2 cents.
|
Hey cool map, pretty interesting and I see some really cool strategies/concepts with this Unique gas wall thingy haha.
Thanks for making!
Just gonna throw this out, have you considered making the very middle a raised area? (higher than the Last edit: 2011-02-07 12:22:29
natural areas, aka 3 stories)
Thats a really cool idea, thank you! I am going to mess around with it and see what comes out.
a map like this, with rotaional symmetry only needs 1 xelnaga tower in the dead center of the map, having those 4 xel nagas is a bit overkill and really allows you to control the map almost too well. Basically I feel like xelnaga towers should never really overlap each other, and there is no way to balance out the towers without removing them and putting just 1 in the center like Delta Quadrant. Just my 2 cents.
Just for the record, towers cannot see each other, otherwise I would agree off the bat. On previous maps (particularly Rhinelands and Neo Enigma), players have complained that there is only one tower.
With one tower, it is useless in every position except cross [which happens 1/5 of the time], so I like 4 for now. If it turns out to be too map-altering, I can obviously change it.
Neat map! I like that you're using new ideas. Experimenting is top notch.
I remember seeing a thread on the subject of using geysers to block pathing. I guess it struck a chord with you. Nice implementation!
I agree with whoever said the map looks a little small. On the other hand, maybe it's just right. Only testing will tell.
From multiple+ test games, it has not been too small. I want to avoid making it bigger right now because
--natural is already easy to hold
--bigger would make more wasted space with this concept
--proportions are precise right now (check in-game)
|
For reference, there's this great thread from a little while ago about geysers and pathing.
One thing to note is that Adagio has a small positional imbalance because two of the 3rds have vertical geysers. Say you're trying to break in with zerglings. Against vertical geysers, you only have to kill one to let zerglings run in. (I haven't tested this--I'm going off of the info in the other thread.) I don't think this matters at all because rotational adjacent spawns are already assymetrical; I can't see why this would have a significant impact, but I thought I'd bring it up.
The proportions are fine. I don't think you should change the size at all. I'm a little put off by the length to clockwise 3rd. The person spawning anticlockwise has rather an easier 3rd.
The high ground center would definitely make things more dynamic. Might be tricky preserving the space fitting in the ramps. I like either way.
Have you thought about putting rocks on the ramp to 3rd, thereby creating semi islands? Just an idea. Probably for a different map.
|
On February 07 2011 13:02 EatThePath wrote:For reference, there's this great thread from a little while ago about geysers and pathing. One thing to note is that Adagio has a small positional imbalance because two of the 3rds have vertical geysers. Say you're trying to break in with zerglings. Against vertical geysers, you only have to kill one to let zerglings run in. (I haven't tested this--I'm going off of the info in the other thread.) I don't think this matters at all because rotational adjacent spawns are already assymetrical; I can't see why this would have a significant impact, but I thought I'd bring it up. The proportions are fine. I don't think you should change the size at all. I'm a little put off by the length to clockwise 3rd. The person spawning anticlockwise has rather an easier 3rd. The high ground center would definitely make things more dynamic. Might be tricky preserving the space fitting in the ramps. I like either way. Have you thought about putting rocks on the ramp to 3rd, thereby creating semi islands? Just an idea. Probably for a different map.
The counter-clockwise player has a closer third, but not easier to defend by land or air/drop harass.
I have thought about adding rocks the 3rd-- its a neat idea. The reason I haven't is because it would make it too easy to hold in addition to the natural in non-cross positions.
|
Looks pretty cool, I'd liek to see it used as an iccup map or something!
|
This map just doesn't work in certain MUs in certain positions. If I'm toss in the BR against a Z in the bottom left, I can consistently deny your third your you take the gases. If you expand north, a single proxy pylon lets me pressure that, and punish you the moment you leave your main. Its a neat idea, but it just doesn't work like this.
|
On February 07 2011 13:33 iGrok wrote:
This map just doesn't work in certain MUs in certain positions. If I'm toss in the BR against a Z in the bottom left, I can consistently deny your third your you take the gases. If you expand north, a single proxy pylon lets me pressure that, and punish you the moment you leave your main. Its a neat idea, but it just doesn't work like this.
Lets take an example: Rhinelands, my remake of Byzantium from BW. Adagio was heavily influenced by it. + Show Spoiler +
Scenario: Zerg spawns bottom left. Protoss spawns bottom right. This can be pictured on BOTH maps.
Step 1) Zerg and Protoss both expand to their natural.
Note: Zerg is going to have an easier time harassing the Protoss natural with mutas
-------------------------- Balance Issue area-------------------
Step 2) Now players are looking to get thirds. Protoss expands to his designated third. Zerg expands to the north (top left) third or natural.
--Zerg can defend their half of the map very easily (including natural)
--Protoss can defend third relatively easy, but natural is open to air harass
----> Protoss has to defend 2 pathways (because third has backdoor)
----> Zerg has to defend 1 path (because third has no backdoor)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 3) Zerg can quite easily expand again. Protoss has slightly farther distance to cover. Since Zerg needs to be ahead on base count, it is quite easy for Zerg to stay "on par" with Protoss.
TL;DR- We can't really jump to balance conclusions without more testing. What we are getting into is very precise. From the games I have played (5+ ZvP) it has not been an issue.
|
1) 2base Zerg doesn't get mutas. ZvP Spire goes down on 3 base, 5 gas, infestors come in at 6 gas.
2) The entrance to the main vs the northern third option are much longer in Adagio.
3) Yes, protoss will be stuck on 3base for a while. But Zerg will be stuck on 2.5 :/. If Z can somehow hold the northern expo from any harassment, they'll stand a chance.
|
On February 07 2011 14:10 iGrok wrote:
1) 2base Zerg doesn't get mutas. ZvP Spire goes down on 3 base, 5 gas, infestors come in at 6 gas.
2) The entrance to the main vs the northern third option are much longer in Adagio.
3) Yes, protoss will be stuck on 3base for a while. But Zerg will be stuck on 2.5 :/. If Z can somehow hold the northern expo from any harassment, they'll stand a chance.
1) 2 base zerg doesn't get mutas? Period?
2) Zerg can defend third with an army in one spot, Protoss can be killed by "run-by's"
3) Nobody is stuck on bases, expanding is easy
Lets continue this in skype lol 
|
tell me if I got this right:
As soon as u take ur 3rd and build buildings over the geysers, you are suddently way more fragile to attacks because you cant defend it anymore?
|
I'm going to go back to the comparison between Rhinelands and Adagio.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KKGlR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9xWWl.jpg)
On Rhinelands, if it would benefit you to take the expansion away from your opponent, you can do so.
On Adagio, it is more difficult because of where the thirds are located in relation to one another. If Zerg spawns bottom left and Terran spawns bottom right, Zerg's intended third is moved to the 9 o'clock third. This third is generally more difficult to defend because it is farther away, but since Terran spawned bottom right, it's the most logical third. In relation to Rhinelands, the third is more dangerous than the third of an equivalent scenario on that map. I ran into this problem on Noon Hill, but now I've managed to make sure that expanding in either direction is possible and equally viable/easy to defend.
This is also without really taking the geysers of the thirds into effect, which could be even more annoying to deal with, but it does make up for the thirds small ramp, so I understand this, the problem is that you can get attack from two directions into the third.
I just confused myself with my own post >.<
I'll post it anyway, maybe you'll figure out what I mean.
|
On February 07 2011 17:41 ihasaKAROT wrote:
tell me if I got this right:
As soon as u take ur 3rd and build buildings over the geysers, you are suddently way more fragile to attacks because you cant defend it anymore?
That is correct. Because of the free natural, taking your third cannot be too easy-- which is still pretty dang easy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dBDu7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jTNiX.jpg)
