|
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/UiqmH.jpg)
Finalist in this month's Map of the Month tournament!
Available on: EU / US
Updates:
V1.2:
- The tank-blocking doodads at the 'outside' third have been changed to better represent their purpose to players.
- The graphical bug with the broken wall sections showing up off-colour on low graphics settings has been fixed (using a custom texture).
V1.1:
- Added additional doodads to block siege tank access to the area behind the 'outside' third
- Other minor aesthetic changes
Introduction: + Show Spoiler +Sanctuarium is my first 4 spawn rotationally symmetric map, something I've shied away from until now primarily because the nature of rotational symmetry often creates imbalances when players spawn at close positions. With that in mind, I tried to create a map that alleviated these problems as best I could.
I think the biggest (typical) problem with maps like this is the third base. Either the third is easier for one player than the other (in close positions) or if the thirds are equidistant they're often quite far away - so I decided to give each player 2 options; regardless of spawns they can always expand towards or away from their opponent, to a relatively close third base. The thirds themselves are designed to be quite equally appealing and safe, one is nearer the middle of the map but a bit tighter and harder to attack, while the other is nearer the outside of the map but more open and is usually a bit harder to defend.
In the mid to late game, the central high ground is typically the best place from which to launch an attack, and there is a central watchtower which encourages players to use this area, though it's vision can be circumvented by manoeuvring around it's perimeter.
Some other notable features include the small "drop zone" (no LOS blockers) in each players main which also doubles as a great location to place a pylon for low ground warp-ins, some lush pathways around the middle of the map with LOSB's, and a rather unique natural choke.
Map Details: + Show Spoiler +Spawns: 2, 5, 7 & 11
Size: 136x136 (playable)
Bases: 16
Watchtowers: 1 (central)
Rocks: None
LOSB's: 4 strips in the grassy areas around the middle
Tileset: Huge mix of Agria, Aiur, Bel'Shir, Korhal and Xil.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/hKTry.jpg)
(SUPER-HQ) Top-Down View
(SUPER-HQ) Angled View
Map Analyzer Images: + Show Spoiler +
Vanity Shots: + Show Spoiler +
Hope you guys like it and give it a try! Please let me know what you think 
|
First!
[edit] I think that's the only time I'll ever do that, lol. I'm so glad to see you in top 5 again, func. I love the aesthetics on this map, it hurts to love the layout so much too. I don't know what to say, very nice. ;D
User was warned for this post
|
looks pretty nice and fun to play
|
I love this map, it's really simple but looks fun and balanced Definitely my favorite for MotM#3 together with Leviathan .
|
Absolutely brilliant!
When I saw this map posted I thought to myself: I seriously need to step up my game. This map accomplishes a lot of the things I failed to achieve with my map Thunder Temple.
After so many attempts at a rotational layout, it´s so cool to see a map that just nails it!
|
United States10154 Posts
i love the map because no matter which 3rd base you take, it will have its risks.
10/10
|
@EatThePath - Not going to hide it, but I'm glad I made the top 5 too! ;D I was honestly more worried this month than last month, as always loads of great submissions. I suppose your lack of words is in a way the best possible compliment
@forelmashi - Thank you! I implore you to try it out in game if you have the time.
@Ragoo - cheers man, glad you like it, though Leviathan scares me :S
@Johanaz - I wouldn't agree that you need to seriously step up your game at all, Mud Rock for example was awesome, and I really liked Thunder Temple and Zhakul Strife too. I'm hesitant to agree I nailed the layout just yet since it's my first rotational 4 player map, I guess we'll have to wait and see how the tournament goes. Happy you like it though!
@FlaShFTW - You really hit on what's basically the key theme of this map, a balanced variety of options to expand, something good for all races in any spawn position. Therefore it warms my heart that you like it especially for this reason :D
Thanks for the replies guys!
|
|
|
Needless to say (sicne Im last to say it) beautiful in many ways. Even your logo rocks. Did you change the lighting btw, I think the shadows looks deeper?
Anyways I toyed aroudn with lighting some and messed it up by making the map darker, lower saturation and higher contrast. I thought it looked great for the textures, etc but the untis looked different and ugly .. portraits were parely seen, noone could see anything in the fog of war, etc.
|
Wow this is a really good map. Better aesthetics than I could ever dream of doing :O
The layout is really well done, although its really simple. Looks balanced though. One of the best customs I've seen in a while.
This map doesn't really have any issues that you should change, but in the future I think you should try to avoid 4bases being bunched up like they are. It makes really turtle games, especially TvT with tanks. And it leads to a million hidden expos which is kinda gimmicky and annoying (watch StarTale IMS on Neo Enigma, oh my god lol).
Looks like the main and natural mineral lines can bother be sieged. I don't think it matters since the tanks are right in the attack lane (and the map is a boss). Again, just try to avoid this in the future.
edit: have to say, the map could have a less confusing to spell name
|
@adso - you're most welcome!
@Meltage - Yes, I did tweak the lighting a bit, but not a huge amount. It's easy with the editor to go nuts with the light settings and think it looks awesome (and in a way, it often really does look awesome) but it doesn't take much for it to be quite distracting in-game, or as you say make units or the FoW look weird. So yeah, I actually started with the Zhakul'Das lightset (since it's awesome, I think it's because the specular levels are slightly above normal which makes textures pop nicely) and then all I really did was alter the Global, Key and Fill colours slightly to give the map a slightly more blue hue instead of the bright green of Zhakul and that was pretty much it I think. 'Grats on making the top 5 btw, good luck in the rest of the tournament
@monitor - Thanks man, really appreciate the reply. You mentioned the "4-base-bunch" when I showed you this map a while ago, and I experimented with having just the one third base instead of two but it just felt so bland and unoriginal (perhaps with good reason). I did however move the more central thirds slightly further away from the natural choke and removed part of the small wall next to it to make it a bit harder to defend (with tanks especially, since it's typically the more attractive third for terrans over the other races).
There's definitely potential for hidden expo's, but it shouldn't be too difficult to scout them due to the bases close proximity. As for tanking the main and natural, I did test this out a couple of times and it never really seemed overpowered or too difficult to defend, it's actually very hard for tanks to even get in position. Regardless thanks for pointing this out, it's definitely something that should typically be avoided.
As for the name, it was a last minute thing. Literally an hour before I submitted the map for MotM#3 I still hadn't come up with one (it's probably one of my biggest issues when making maps...). 'Sanctuary' seemed fitting but not very original so I added 'ium' at the end =/. After reading dezi's thoughts on judging the competition this month I feel like I should steal prodiG's idea and call it Jurassic Park ;D
Thanks for the comments
|
Well I guess it's been said already, both layout and aesthetics are 10/10.
I hope this map will be as succesful as Testbug, it's maps like these we want to see in highlevel play and tournaments. I wish you best of luck with it and hopefully some influencial people agree with me
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Only concern i have in terms of aesthetics is that you didn't hide the cliff bug (between the 2 different cliff types).
|
@Archvil3 - Thanks! I hope some influential people agree with you too ;D Though I'm not going to get my hopes up just yet, will have to see what happens.
@dezi - Where? I did my best to cover up most of the ones that were visible or would be visible in game, can you point out some areas specifically which aren't hidden? Perhaps I missed some.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
It's most noticeable in the editor but also ingame you might some akward cliff merges.
|
Ouh my god, its actually possible to take a 3rd on close positions??? :O
You sir, have amazed me...
|
funcmode, you truly are a genius.
it seems like you have found the most perfect solution to the rotational symmetry balance problem using these double ramps at the natural entrance :D
|
@dezi - I'll take another look over the map and see if there are any major gaps I missed. I did however leave a lot of the gaps as they were intentionally as you can't see the hole from the in-game perspective (even if you rotate the camera) and I didn't want to ruin the appearance of the edges by having unnecessary doodads there just to cover up a hole you can't even see, but like I said I'll take a look.
@julius33 - heh, that's the idea yeah I'd still like to see some more games on the map before I'm totally convinced I'm happy with the layout though.
@lefix - The double ramps are indeed a key part of the maps layout and were one of the first parts I designed. I'm not sure if it makes me a genius, but regardless thank you for the comment
As I said, I'd like to see some more games before I'm convinced with the design, so if anyone wants to help out by sending me replays you can either PM me or just send them straight to funcmode(at)gmail(dot)com - I'd really appreciate it, thank you!
|
i played it yesterday and i had a small problem with my third.
these little highgrounds really limit the space there. i would prefer u remove those.
|
On March 12 2011 22:06 Mereel wrote:
i played it yesterday and i had a small problem with my third.
these little highgrounds really limit the space there. i would prefer u remove those.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/zyxCL.jpg)
You really think this is not enough space? Personally I think that expo would be far too hard to hold without that small wall or at least something there, but no-one really brought it up before so I guessed it was fine. Anyone else willing to weigh in on this issue?
|
Definitely enough space there, judging from the pictures the openness is perfectly fine for all races, don't worry dude 
|
On March 13 2011 06:13 funcmode wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 22:06 Mereel wrote:
i played it yesterday and i had a small problem with my third.
these little highgrounds really limit the space there. i would prefer u remove those. You really think this is not enough space? Personally I think that expo would be far too hard to hold without that small wall or at least something there, but no-one really brought it up before so I guessed it was fine. Anyone else willing to weigh in on this issue?
I think its good there, but you might consider making it lowground. That way it chokes it up, but still makes it easy to hold (because of vision). Really up to you, don't think it would change much-- but don't remove it.
|
Possibly the best map I have ever seen =D
I love how many Expansions there are, and how wide open the map is
Cannot wait to play this non stop
Great Work!
|
im talking about the other third^^
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YBFSH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6dmXa.jpg)
normaly i would build my extra gates at the third but there is no place for it. also a planetary fortress becomes much stronger in a narrow path.
|
On March 13 2011 20:40 Mereel wrote:im talking about the other third^^ + Show Spoiler +normaly i would build my extra gates at the third but there is no place for it. also a planetary fortress becomes much stronger in a narrow path.
That's the same third as the picture I took a few posts ago, and of course they're all completely identical
Space there is a bit tight, but it's supposed to be that way. The two optional third's are delicately balanced so that there are both pros and cons for taking either of them. This third in question is designed to be the most appealing for Terrans especially, so naturally I tested planetary fortresses and they didn't seem to be overpowered in this position.
Also, I don't quite understand why you'd build additional warpgates at the third expo unless it was your intention to wall it off or make it narrower still, in which case there's definitely space for 3-5 structures around the expo. But since the location of warpgates in terms of producing units is irrelevant, I don't see why you'd need to build them at the third when there's still lots of space in the main to use?
I do appreciate your concern of course, and I will be paying lots of attention to this aspect of the map's layout whenever I get the chance to see games played on the map, but for now I think I'm quite content with it.
oh and @Exstasy - thanks for the compliments, I'm glad you like it and enjoy playing on it
|
The only problem as of right now I can think of is that the natural seems a bit vulnurable to Siege Tanks when the Terran is in counter clockwise position.
|
i had a little graphical glitch where all the inserted wall pieces in the cliffs were dyed dark purple, not really matching the color.
|
@FlopTurnReaver - In light of you saying this, I went and investigated the power of siege tanks in this position further. I was rather sad to discover that siege tanks could enter the small areas behind the minerals and gas right next to the natural (I always thought tanks couldn't fit through a 1-square gap, but in some cases it seems they can), allowing them to range most of the natural.
So, I've added a couple of small doodads which conveniently block tank access to the space behind the minerals/gas, while still allowing smaller units to pass through. You can see the doodads in this image:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Q9LRa.jpg)
Note that a couple of tanks can still range a few mineral patches, and a medivac can still drop a tank or two into the area behind the minerals, but the tanks themselves can no longer access it on the ground. I hope that this change is significant enough to stop this from becoming a true positional imbalance. More thoughts on this would be welcome.
@lefix - Yeah, I mentioned this in the note at the end of the OP. It's some strange quirk with the way custom colours affect this doodad specifically, it either looks fine on high or low graphic settings but not both. I've been trying to find a way to make it work without using a custom texture for it (increases the size (MB) of the map) but have had no luck, so I guess I'll get to work on that custom texture...
Version 1.1 has now been released with the above mentioned tank-blocking doodads.
|
On March 13 2011 20:40 Mereel wrote:
im talking about the other third^^
This map looks pretty cool, and Mereel's quote sums it up for me. I really like the option to choose 3rd and 4th direction from your base. It's pretty neat to be able to scout them and just expand in the opposite direction. Aesthetics are beautiful too.
|
I think the tank-blocking doodads are a good change, but there's always this problem of making it clear to players how the map works. Have you considered whether players might get frustrated if their tanks jitter when it looks like they might fit through?
Or maybe players will just find out in practice games they can't get tanks in there
|
Version 1.2 of Sanctuarium has been released:
- The tank-blocking doodads at the 'outside' third have been changed to better represent their purpose to players (see screenshot).
- The graphical bug with the broken wall sections showing up off-colour on low graphics settings has been fixed (using a custom texture).
Here's an image showing the new doodads around the third:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/407bU.jpg)
@dimfish - I did my best with this new version to make it obvious to players that getting tanks behind that mineral line shouldn't be possible. I hope players agree, when I was testing it it seemed to me like it should be obvious enough. But in all seriousness, if you have some awesome strategy that hinges completely on being able to put tanks in this location and then you get there and realize you can't... well you only have yourself to blame .
After watching some additional replays on this map, I got to thinking about the watchtower placement. Only a few hours later, FlopTurnReaver PM'd me and brought up the same subject. Essentially the role of the watchtowers in games where players spawn close positions is quite diminished due to the fastest attack path between the two bases not travelling through it's vision.
With that in mind, I experimented with alternative watchtower placement. After a while though, it became readily apparent to me that having 4 watchtowers, even just a tiny bit nearer the outside of the map, made turtling far too powerful by giving players easy vision of both ramps up to the natural. There was one location which seemed like it could be an improvement, however putting one there as is would give a player vision in to the main base (protoss OP) and even then wouldn't give much of a heads up when an attack is moving out, since the distances between the two natural ramps is quite small to begin with.
So, I'm leaving the watchtower as it is for now. In close positions, it won't see much effective use until one player takes a third base, and players will just have to get used to the fact that being in control of the watchtower doesn't mean you're immune to surprise attacks (especially in close positions).
|
On March 18 2011 08:27 funcmode wrote:
So, I'm leaving the watchtower as it is for now. In close positions, it won't see much effective use until one player takes a third base, and players will just have to get used to the fact that being in control of the watchtower doesn't mean you're immune to surprise attacks (especially in close positions).
Poor babies. It's just fine in the close positions games I've played. XWT coddle the weak. =D
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
The XWT is fine as it is - why should XWTs always enable you to scout early movement (non-cross-spawns)? This XWT gives an advantage during the later stages of the game where the mid becomes more important. I think this is absolutely fine and good. If you want to scout early engagements you have those awesome cliffs at the 3rds screaming 'place overlord here'.
|
from the iCCup Testbug thread:
On March 24 2011 07:30 funcmode wrote:Yeah I fixed that in the latest update (check the map thread for details) - however the MotM version hasn't been updated yet (on EU at least, not sure about US).
I took that screenshot on your upload of the map. But now that I played it again it was all fine. Also everything was fine on the MotM version now. I have all graphic settings on highest possible.
So apparently this still happens randomly sometimes.
|
On March 24 2011 07:46 Ragoo wrote:from the iCCup Testbug thread: Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 07:30 funcmode wrote:On March 24 2011 07:08 Ragoo wrote:@funcmode: on a sidenote, this doesnt look right + Show Spoiler + Yeah I fixed that in the latest update (check the map thread for details) - however the MotM version hasn't been updated yet (on EU at least, not sure about US). I took that screenshot on your upload of the map. But now that I played it again it was all fine. Also everything was fine on the MotM version now. I have all graphic settings on highest possible. So apparently this still happens randomly sometimes.
You're absolutely positive you took that SS on my version? That's very peculiar if true. If it's fine on both now then I guess you can't reproduce the problem... Theoretically (if the EU version hasn't been updated yet), then it should look a bit funky on low settings, and fine on high/ultra and maybe medium. My latest version should look fine on any graphics settings.
|
I made 100% sure that this screenshot is from your version (so I don't talk any bullshit) and I took it today just before I posted that response
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/qH18I.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/qkfze.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/D4EOP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/icVlk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/LO16A.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/RMzRL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/mVAOz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dRnb2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/L0izb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/it6yy.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wVYXV.jpg)
