|
your Country52797 Posts
Steppes of Gore:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4dXal.jpg)
Bounds: 162x164
Watchtowers: 2
Bases: 12blue 2gold
Rocks: 4
Textures: pure char.
Steppes of Bore (old):
+ Show Spoiler +Old post + Show Spoiler +Dimensions: 122x126. Rush distances: Main to main: 161 Nat to Nat: 127. Original Description: This is my version of the ever so popular Steppes of War. Rush distances are longer, and it's a very macro style map. Steppes of Bore is currently a work in progress. Please let me know how to improve it. (And, of course, a reminder to please test it on NA) Edit: Poll from page 3: Poll: 14 bases on 2 player maps?Yes! (8) 67% No! (2) 17% I'm not sure, it needs more testing. (2) 17% 12 total votes Your vote: 14 bases on 2 player maps? (Vote): Yes!
(Vote): No!
(Vote): I'm not sure, it needs more testing.
Unless there is a massive flaw in this map that makes it unplayable permanently, I will be submitting this to the TL mapmaking contest, as well as Korhal Brawl and one other undecided map (probably Golgotha), by Sunday evening in USA time. So, I would like feedback within the next 48 hours, as that will be the only feedback I will be using for the last update before the contest. Also, I need testers. See signature if you want to test with me (yeah right), also I would not mind you finding bugs on your own. Steppes of Bore V5.0:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/V1xoY.jpg) Boring, old, outdated version. + Show Spoiler +(2) Steppes of Bore v4.0:+ Show Spoiler +This is my version of the ever so popular Steppes of War. Please test this on NA.Rush distances are longer, and it's a very macro style map. Steppes of Bore is currently a work in progress. Please let me know how to improve it. Problems: + Show Spoiler + CHALLENGE ME. And, the natural is too big.
Map is published in NA under the name "Steppes of Bore", by TheTemplar. Changelog: 2.0: + Show Spoiler + The natural expansion is now smaller around the old edges, and the ramp has been moved to closer to the third, to make the third easier to take. The ramp between the third and the gold leading into the third is now smaller and blocked by destructible rocks. Even though it was requested by 2 (?) people, the gold is still a gold base. I did this because I think it's a very risky expansion to take. The choke leading into the third is smaller.
2:1: + Show Spoiler +Middle is cooler.
Watchtowers have been added.
Natural ramp is a little wider. 3.0: + Show Spoiler +More symmetrical, gold base has been moved, new base added, new base and gold base have a cliff over them. The middle high ground has another ramp. 3.1: + Show Spoiler +The middle is connected, the semi-islands really are semi-islands now, and there is LOS blockers on the top of the smaller middle ramps. 4.0: + Show Spoiler +Everything except the main base and semi-islands and blue 4ths have been changed. The changes are halfway down page two. besides asthetics, I hate when people complain about that  Some aesthetic touchups. Water changed to clear colored. Extra base added for each player. Highly asymmetrical, but in a way so that it hardly affects gameplay. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u8JUJ.jpg) Thanks for 5.0 goes to: Namrufus: For influencing the main-nat-third layout + Show Spoiler +On August 27 2011 12:08 Namrufus wrote:I think the map is improved from the last version you posted. If you want to make the natural smaller, I think that you should simply move the face of the natural toward the center of the map closer to the minerals and bring the expansions in the corner slightly closer to the nat. If it were me, I would do something like this: + Show Spoiler +You could also enlarge the main into the natural to reduce the size of the natural. edit: also, for aesthetics, my suggestion is to replace that green xil rock texture in the main and nat with a brick texture from aiur or belshir, SC2 rock textures of that type just look really bad when used in large areas imo. edit2: it looks like the newest versions of the analyzer are here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162365you should try it, it's really useful. HypertonicHydroponic: For helping debug 4.2. + Show Spoiler +On August 30 2011 22:09 HypertonicHydroponic wrote:
Hey, I took a spin on your map since you've been so since to bump my two map threads and here are my thoughts:
(I know this point isn't that important to you but...) To me the geometrical asthetic is more important than the actual textures/doodads and I think that your latest version is not too bad in that regard.
On to stuff you do care about:
~ Someone else mentioned changing the ramp out of the main. I got P on this playing random and I have to say it was tricky to figure out exactly where to place my buildings for the choke. I did wind up making a choke but it took my an extra pylon to fill the right gap. I didn't play around with it any more than a single game, but you might want to play around with it a bit and figure out optimal wall off arrangements for P/T and maybe use some Add Texture to the spots where these buildings should go to make it more intuitive for first time map users so this does not wind up turning them off. At least that's what I would do if I didn't want to change the shape of the choke for some reason.
~ Also, since this is supposed to be a remake of steppes (or at least based on it), which I assume you wanted to make a more friendly remake, I thought that the ramp out of the natural, was actually less friendly as far as holding a push is concerned. It seems much easier to just get in up the ramp since the path is so straightforward. There isn't as much wrap around and pathing getting stuck on the corner of the ramp/cliff the way there is on steppes if you just A-move. Also I think the lack of LOSB actually make it more friendly to the attacker since they never really have to worry what is in front of them before the ramp. This may be intended and I don't know if it is better or worse, but that is my impression. To a sc2 friend for playing PvP against me on this map- We (I) noted that 4-gate was insanely easy on this map (compared to others) for some reason... Fixed that. Countless other people for helping me with their vastly superior mapmaking knowledge and playtesting. (one of those is imaginary). All the people that told me that my map was super ugly. And beyond!
I wouldn't mind a name change 
|
I feel like if you turned the golds into regular bases, and made a ramp from the main to get there directly, blocked by destructible rocks perhaps, that it would be a better option for a third. Would still be kinda tough to hold imo
Not quite sure how I would fix the small rush distance though : /
|
Is that the same dimensions as SoW? It looks awkwardly squished vertically
|
The fourth seems really hard to hold on this map and the dimensions of the map just seem a bit off. Also, your natural has a lot of space to siege up in so it becomes kind of awkward like on backwater gulch.
As suggested you could turn the golds into normal bases and maybe remove a bit of space on the natural.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Well, thank you for commenting. ^_^
I feel like if you turned the golds into regular bases, and made a ramp from the main to get there directly, blocked by destructible rocks perhaps, that it would be a better option for a third. Would still be kinda tough to hold imo
Not quite sure how I would fix the small rush distance though : /
Are you referring to the main extending horizontally to the gold, with a blocked ramp leading into it? That sounds pretty decent, but the mains are already pretty gigantic.
I have a few ideas for fixing the rush distances. I'll implement them ASAP.
Is that the same dimensions as SoW? It looks awkwardly squished vertically
I believe it's very close, if not exactly the same size.
The fourth seems really hard to hold on this map and the dimensions of the map just seem a bit off. Also, your natural has a lot of space to siege up in so it becomes kind of awkward like on backwater gulch.
As suggested you could turn the golds into normal bases and maybe remove a bit of space on the natural.
This is a little trickier... I suppose I could make the natural expansions smaller and increase the rush distances at the same time by moving the ramp and removing part of the area.
I'm not too sure about making the golds normal, but I suppose it would be logical if I make a ramp leading into it (blocked by d-rocks of course) from them main. I really don't see a problem with the size, could you elaborate?
|
The ramp up to the natural seem a bit narrow. The choke that is going to the top and bottom expansions also seem too small. Generally it looks hard to take more expansions than your natural due to the fact that the enemy base is like right in front of you.
The middle could use something to make it more interesting.
|
On July 08 2011 09:00 Cipover wrote:
The ramp up to the natural seem a bit narrow. The choke that is going to the top and bottom expansions also seem too small. Generally it looks hard to take more expansions than your natural due to the fact that the enemy base is like right in front of you.
The middle could use something to make it more interesting.
its called stepps of bore for a reason it nhas to be boring
|
your Country52797 Posts
I have come up with Steppes of Bore, Version 1.1!
+ Show Spoiler +
Changes:+ Show Spoiler + The natural expansion is now smaller around the old edges, and the ramp has been moved to closer to the third, to make the third easier to take. The ramp between the third and the gold leading into the third is now smaller and blocked by destructible rocks. Even though it was requested by 2 (?) people, the gold is still a gold base. I did this because I think it's a very risky expansion to take. The choke leading into the third is smaller.
To answer someone that posted that I didn't reply to, I'm not sure what I'm doing with the middle. Any suggestions?
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 08 2011 09:25 Drazzyo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2011 09:00 Cipover wrote:
The ramp up to the natural seem a bit narrow. The choke that is going to the top and bottom expansions also seem too small. Generally it looks hard to take more expansions than your natural due to the fact that the enemy base is like right in front of you.
The middle could use something to make it more interesting. its called stepps of bore for a reason it nhas to be boring
Very good sir. ^_^ Thank you for being very brutal with me. ;D
I'm working on it, I tell you, but I have no idea what I'm going to do!
|
rename it Steppes of Gore
since that would be cool as hell
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 08 2011 09:32 EternalSC wrote:
rename it Steppes of Gore
since that would be cool as hell
^_^
Now that's not a bad idea...
I'll consider it :o
|
Perhaps lower a small-ish section in the middle to make 2 large chokes on each side sort of like XNC? I like what you did the natural as it helped both your rush distance and third base issues 
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 08 2011 09:36 RedGator wrote:Perhaps lower a small-ish section in the middle to make 2 large chokes on each side sort of like XNC? I like what you did the natural as it helped both your rush distance and third base issues
The middle idea is a very good one.
The second sentence you said makes me feel like a super monkey ninja superhero dude.
Edit: I'm thinking of making the ramp into the natural wider as it seems to be too narrow now. It's the same width as Shakuras's naturals, but the third is harder because in shakuras, it's another natural with a smallish ramp and in this map, it has a backdoor and a somewhat wide choke.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Steppes of Bore v2.1 has been released!
Changes: + Show Spoiler +The ramp leading into the natural is a triple-wide instead of a double-wide.
The middle is more interesting.
Watchtowers have been added. They can see both the gold and the third, along with the rocks leading into the corner semi-islands.
v2.1: + Show Spoiler +
Note: The map does not appear perfectly symettrical. I will work on that in the next update.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Steppes of Bore v3.0 has been released!
Changes: + Show Spoiler +More symmetrical, gold base has been moved, new base added, new base and gold base have a cliff over them. The middle high ground has another ramp.
v3.0: + Show Spoiler +
|
*zzzz double post, please delete*
|
You need to make the center of the map more open. Having that much terrain in the middle of the map makes an engagement there disadvantageous. If you look at Taldaram alter, Shakuras plateau, shattered temple, etc they all have wide open centers with chokes leading into the expansions. Might want to try to model that
Also having two destructable rocks to get to those side expansions seems dumb, and the potential for a siege line on the cliff overlooking your 3rd seems obnoxious as hell.
|
I'm glad to see you kept those random ass Xel Naga Watchtowers on the sides of the map..
Seriously rethink where they should be placed I always thought the original Bliz placement was useless.
|
your Country52797 Posts
People are bringing on the hate. :o
You need to make the center of the map more open. Having that much terrain in the middle of the map makes an engagement there disadvantageous. If you look at Taldaram alter, Shakuras plateau, shattered temple, etc they all have wide open centers with chokes leading into the expansions. Might want to try to model that
Also having two destructable rocks to get to those side expansions seems dumb, and the potential for a siege line on the cliff overlooking your 3rd seems obnoxious as hell.
I already stated that the center is too chokey. I have a solution I will implement in my next update.
The siege line is accessable by both players, and they can easily break the rocks to clear it out. The point of the semi-island is that this is based on Steppes of war, which had a similar semi-island.
The rocks leading in the third are a back door. Simple as that.
I'm glad to see you kept those random ass Xel Naga Watchtowers on the sides of the map..
Seriously rethink where they should be placed I always thought the original Bliz placement was useless.
The watch towers can see if the third and fourth bases are taken. I THINK they can see if any rocks have been broken down or are being broken down.
The watch towers aren't crucial, but very important. Please test my map before reacting harshly to stuff like this.
|
I won't say the map is too "chokey". Shakurah is chokey and fine. I believe your problem lies in how straightforward the desing is. The middle does have all these chokes, but the problem is the extremely small distance between them. This means that you are hyper-advocating a map split, since there really are no ground attack routes to go by that can't easily be reached and fortified by an alert defender. Draw some inspiration from shakurahs here, and add alternate attack routes, while keeping the center as an attractive spot to hold.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 16 2011 00:15 DerNebel wrote:
I won't say the map is too "chokey". Shakurah is chokey and fine. I believe your problem lies in how straightforward the desing is. The middle does have all these chokes, but the problem is the extremely small distance between them. This means that you are hyper-advocating a map split, since there really are no ground attack routes to go by that can't easily be reached and fortified by an alert defender. Draw some inspiration from shakurahs here, and add alternate attack routes, while keeping the center as an attractive spot to hold.
*Thinks really hard* Well, I could connect the two center high ground areas and rearrange some ramps, while removing the rocks leading into the third. This would also address issues of the watchtowers being useless.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Version 3.1 is out!
+ Show Spoiler +
Only two changes:
The middle is more open.
The semi-island rocks could be passed through by smaller units (it was really weird O_o). No longer!
Edit: A third change: The smaller middle ramps have line of sight blockers at the top.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Nobody has any criticism? It must be perfect! I'll send it to all of the tournaments!
Seriously, I know that there's something wrong. Just tell me . Be as brutally honest as you can.
|
tbh everything just looks super wrong.
For a start: chokes are way, way too tight. You can almost never place one width ramps/chokes on anything other than your main and even two width ramps are super narrow.
nat - nat looks very close.
Aesthetics are beyond horrible, can't tell if you tried or just go for layout first?
Looks like you can easily abuse reaper bunker rush on the nat with that cliff towards the middle. I personally wouldn't do that, cause I think it's very very strong on Tal'Darim already.
Can't really tell if the map is too small, kinda looks like it but then again as I said everything looks so wrong...
Don't take it personal please but you have to improve so much... good luck with that
|
Could you have some map analyzer images. Those help alot. The gold also seems very easy for zergs to take if they have control of the middle (rocks maybe??). Also are the thirds siegable form the red places because that would be a major problem.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LoMuD.jpg)
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 19 2011 06:49 Ragoo wrote:tbh everything just looks super wrong. For a start: chokes are way, way too tight. You can almost never place one width ramps/chokes on anything other than your main and even two width ramps are super narrow. nat - nat looks very close. Aesthetics are beyond horrible, can't tell if you tried or just go for layout first? Looks like you can easily abuse reaper bunker rush on the nat with that cliff towards the middle. I personally wouldn't do that, cause I think it's very very strong on Tal'Darim already. Can't really tell if the map is too small, kinda looks like it but then again as I said everything looks so wrong... Don't take it personal please but you have to improve so much... good luck with that
Which is better, THIS (1.0)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7R96A.jpg)
or THIS? (current version)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/V4e7z.jpg)
Tell me that the current version isn't way better. ^_^. Of course, there are a couple of things I'm going to add to the current version that were in 1.0.
I'm thinking of removing the rocks into the third and making the ramp/high ground area wider to help against the seigable third. It is currently very easy to completely own a zerg from that ledge.
The aesthetics are preliminary, meaning I'll try to make it prettier but it will turn out a complete disaster .
|
Could you post size of the map and analyzer pics (nat-nat distance and summary is the only important thing I want to see).
|
On July 19 2011 07:25 Ragoo wrote:
Could you post size of the map and analyzer pics (nat-nat distance and summary is the only important thing I want to see).
Haha so true.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 19 2011 07:25 Ragoo wrote:
Could you post size of the map and analyzer pics (nat-nat distance and summary is the only important thing I want to see).
I don't have the program 
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 19 2011 06:52 AaronJ wrote:Could you have some map analyzer images. Those help alot. The gold also seems very easy for zergs to take if they have control of the middle (rocks maybe??). Also are the thirds siegable form the red places because that would be a major problem.
The third is siegable I believe, I'll be fixing that.
Rocks on the gold do seem like a reasonable option.
|
Alright, I'll just begin with the suggestions.
The main is pretty nicely laid out. Good work on that. My only concern is that the ramp leading to the natural doesn't have much space to build to the side. This can really be a pain for Terran for add-ons and rallying units because there isn't enough space.
--- I would like to see the ramp moved slightly farther away from the map bounds.
The natural has a really awkward shape. with so much terrain sticking out, it makes very awkward building placement, with no good place to put an army. If you build next to the natural's CC, then units can't walk around very easily. If you build on the edges of the natural, you're completely vulnerable from the low ground, and units then move through the mineral line to get out. The really long piece of terrain jutting out is just a nuisance to deal with proxies, reapers/colossi, drops, and nydus.
--- Try to make the natural more rounded, like on Neo Enigma.
The ramp leading out of the natural is really far away, and doesn't allow for easy troop movement towards the gold. This is a problem because defending these expansions requires units too spread out too far. You can take the expansions in your corner, but this really doesn't leave many options for aggressive or defensive expanding.
--- I suggest altering the ramp to something like this.
The expansions in the corners are really too tightly packed. This is a problem because
- The expansions cannot be split between the players
- There is little army movement required to defend the expansions
- Once you take one, the other(s) is free
Some maps have concepts that allow for close expansions, but rarely in 2 player maps. Try to focus on making each expansion really have a meaning in the map- which part of the map must you control, and how does it fit the concept?
--- I would adjust the 3rd and gold to something like this.
The center would still need something to block up how open it is. Right now, there's too much space to get surrounds and flanks. The high ground doesn't really add a choke, it just gives a bit of different in terrain (using vision to your advantage when retreating). I'm not really sure what should go here, but you should experiment with adding a high ground structure to the middle like this.
Hopefully this helps!
[edit] I also suggest removing the straight lines, they look pretty ugly and they are annoying to build next to.
Oh- If you want to do some aesthetics, you might try doing some aesthetics on BelShir (considered the easiest). Here is a bad map I made on BelShir (it doesn't look very good, but its not super difficult).
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 19 2011 12:18 monitor wrote:Alright, I'll just begin with the suggestions. The main is pretty nicely laid out. Good work on that. My only concern is that the ramp leading to the natural doesn't have much space to build to the side. This can really be a pain for Terran for add-ons and rallying units because there isn't enough space. --- I would like to see the ramp moved slightly farther away from the map bounds. The natural has a really awkward shape. with so much terrain sticking out, it makes very awkward building placement, with no good place to put an army. If you build next to the natural's CC, then units can't walk around very easily. If you build on the edges of the natural, you're completely vulnerable from the low ground, and units then move through the mineral line to get out. The really long piece of terrain jutting out is just a nuisance to deal with proxies, reapers/colossi, drops, and nydus. --- Try to make the natural more rounded, like on Neo Enigma. The ramp leading out of the natural is really far away, and doesn't allow for easy troop movement towards the gold. This is a problem because defending these expansions requires units too spread out too far. You can take the expansions in your corner, but this really doesn't leave many options for aggressive or defensive expanding. --- I suggest altering the ramp to something like this.The expansions in the corners are really too tightly packed. This is a problem because - The expansions cannot be split between the players - There is little army movement required to defend the expansions - Once you take one, the other(s) is free Some maps have concepts that allow for close expansions, but rarely in 2 player maps. Try to focus on making each expansion really have a meaning in the map- which part of the map must you control, and how does it fit the concept? --- I would adjust the 3rd and gold to something like this.The center would still need something to block up how open it is. Right now, there's too much space to get surrounds and flanks. The high ground doesn't really add a choke, it just gives a bit of different in terrain (using vision to your advantage when retreating). I'm not really sure what should go here, but you should experiment with adding a high ground structure to the middle like this.Hopefully this helps! [edit] I also suggest removing the straight lines, they look pretty ugly and they are annoying to build next to. Oh- If you want to do some aesthetics, you might try doing some aesthetics on BelShir (considered the easiest). Here is a bad map I made on BelShir (it doesn't look very good, but its not super difficult).
Working on some of your suggestions and a few others that others have come up with.
I made a map on bel'shir. It was the worst looking map I've ever seen in the entire world of starcraft.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Steppes of Bore Version 4.0 has come out!
Changes: Third has been pushed back slightly, gold moved, natural completely redone. The ramp leading down into the third is wider, not blocked by rocks, that high ground area is wider, the gold has destructible debris blocking a command center/hatch/nexus.
Problems still lingering from before: The natural is massive. Every base but the main and natural (edit: and third) is siegable.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Iyim3.jpg)
|
On July 20 2011 02:50 TehTemplar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2011 12:18 monitor wrote:Alright, I'll just begin with the suggestions. The main is pretty nicely laid out. Good work on that. My only concern is that the ramp leading to the natural doesn't have much space to build to the side. This can really be a pain for Terran for add-ons and rallying units because there isn't enough space. --- I would like to see the ramp moved slightly farther away from the map bounds. The natural has a really awkward shape. with so much terrain sticking out, it makes very awkward building placement, with no good place to put an army. If you build next to the natural's CC, then units can't walk around very easily. If you build on the edges of the natural, you're completely vulnerable from the low ground, and units then move through the mineral line to get out. The really long piece of terrain jutting out is just a nuisance to deal with proxies, reapers/colossi, drops, and nydus. --- Try to make the natural more rounded, like on Neo Enigma. The ramp leading out of the natural is really far away, and doesn't allow for easy troop movement towards the gold. This is a problem because defending these expansions requires units too spread out too far. You can take the expansions in your corner, but this really doesn't leave many options for aggressive or defensive expanding. --- I suggest altering the ramp to something like this.The expansions in the corners are really too tightly packed. This is a problem because - The expansions cannot be split between the players - There is little army movement required to defend the expansions - Once you take one, the other(s) is free Some maps have concepts that allow for close expansions, but rarely in 2 player maps. Try to focus on making each expansion really have a meaning in the map- which part of the map must you control, and how does it fit the concept? --- I would adjust the 3rd and gold to something like this.The center would still need something to block up how open it is. Right now, there's too much space to get surrounds and flanks. The high ground doesn't really add a choke, it just gives a bit of different in terrain (using vision to your advantage when retreating). I'm not really sure what should go here, but you should experiment with adding a high ground structure to the middle like this.Hopefully this helps! [edit] I also suggest removing the straight lines, they look pretty ugly and they are annoying to build next to. Oh- If you want to do some aesthetics, you might try doing some aesthetics on BelShir (considered the easiest). Here is a bad map I made on BelShir (it doesn't look very good, but its not super difficult). Working on some of your suggestions and a few others that others have come up with. I made a map on bel'shir. It was the worst looking map I've ever seen in the entire world of starcraft.
Just want to make sure, you know the underlined words in my post are links to images?
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 20 2011 03:03 monitor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2011 02:50 TehTemplar wrote:On July 19 2011 12:18 monitor wrote:Alright, I'll just begin with the suggestions. The main is pretty nicely laid out. Good work on that. My only concern is that the ramp leading to the natural doesn't have much space to build to the side. This can really be a pain for Terran for add-ons and rallying units because there isn't enough space. --- I would like to see the ramp moved slightly farther away from the map bounds. The natural has a really awkward shape. with so much terrain sticking out, it makes very awkward building placement, with no good place to put an army. If you build next to the natural's CC, then units can't walk around very easily. If you build on the edges of the natural, you're completely vulnerable from the low ground, and units then move through the mineral line to get out. The really long piece of terrain jutting out is just a nuisance to deal with proxies, reapers/colossi, drops, and nydus. --- Try to make the natural more rounded, like on Neo Enigma. The ramp leading out of the natural is really far away, and doesn't allow for easy troop movement towards the gold. This is a problem because defending these expansions requires units too spread out too far. You can take the expansions in your corner, but this really doesn't leave many options for aggressive or defensive expanding. --- I suggest altering the ramp to something like this.The expansions in the corners are really too tightly packed. This is a problem because - The expansions cannot be split between the players - There is little army movement required to defend the expansions - Once you take one, the other(s) is free Some maps have concepts that allow for close expansions, but rarely in 2 player maps. Try to focus on making each expansion really have a meaning in the map- which part of the map must you control, and how does it fit the concept? --- I would adjust the 3rd and gold to something like this.The center would still need something to block up how open it is. Right now, there's too much space to get surrounds and flanks. The high ground doesn't really add a choke, it just gives a bit of different in terrain (using vision to your advantage when retreating). I'm not really sure what should go here, but you should experiment with adding a high ground structure to the middle like this.Hopefully this helps! [edit] I also suggest removing the straight lines, they look pretty ugly and they are annoying to build next to. Oh- If you want to do some aesthetics, you might try doing some aesthetics on BelShir (considered the easiest). Here is a bad map I made on BelShir (it doesn't look very good, but its not super difficult). Working on some of your suggestions and a few others that others have come up with. I made a map on bel'shir. It was the worst looking map I've ever seen in the entire world of starcraft. Just want to make sure, you know the underlined words in my post are links to images?
I'm not stupid
|
your Country52797 Posts
Ok, I did some tests in-game.
Main-to-main is about 162 (72 seconds with a marine, ~57 and 2/3 seconds with an SCV). The third is NOT siegable. 5 mineral patches and a geyser of the gold are siegable from that ledge, along with both geysers and 4 mineral fields of the fourth (blue).
|
|
|
I think the map is improved from the last version you posted.
If you want to make the natural smaller, I think that you should simply move the face of the natural toward the center of the map closer to the minerals and bring the expansions in the corner slightly closer to the nat.
If it were me, I would do something like this:
+ Show Spoiler +
You could also enlarge the main into the natural to reduce the size of the natural.
edit: also, for aesthetics, my suggestion is to replace that green xil rock texture in the main and nat with a brick texture from aiur or belshir, SC2 rock textures of that type just look really bad when used in large areas imo.
edit2: I don't have the program
it looks like the newest versions of the analyzer are here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162365
you should try it, it's really useful.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On August 27 2011 12:08 Namrufus wrote:I think the map is improved from the last version you posted. If you want to make the natural smaller, I think that you should simply move the face of the natural toward the center of the map closer to the minerals and bring the expansions in the corner slightly closer to the nat. If it were me, I would do something like this: + Show Spoiler +You could also enlarge the main into the natural to reduce the size of the natural. edit: also, for aesthetics, my suggestion is to replace that green xil rock texture in the main and nat with a brick texture from aiur or belshir, SC2 rock textures of that type just look really bad when used in large areas imo. edit2: it looks like the newest versions of the analyzer are here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162365you should try it, it's really useful.
Thanks!
|
Hey, I took a spin on your map since you've been so since to bump my two map threads and here are my thoughts:
(I know this point isn't that important to you but...) To me the geometrical asthetic is more important than the actual textures/doodads and I think that your latest version is not too bad in that regard.
On to stuff you do care about:
~ Someone else mentioned changing the ramp out of the main. I got P on this playing random and I have to say it was tricky to figure out exactly where to place my buildings for the choke. I did wind up making a choke but it took my an extra pylon to fill the right gap. I didn't play around with it any more than a single game, but you might want to play around with it a bit and figure out optimal wall off arrangements for P/T and maybe use some Add Texture to the spots where these buildings should go to make it more intuitive for first time map users so this does not wind up turning them off. At least that's what I would do if I didn't want to change the shape of the choke for some reason.
~ Also, since this is supposed to be a remake of steppes (or at least based on it), which I assume you wanted to make a more friendly remake, I thought that the ramp out of the natural, was actually less friendly as far as holding a push is concerned. It seems much easier to just get in up the ramp since the path is so straightforward. There isn't as much wrap around and pathing getting stuck on the corner of the ramp/cliff the way there is on steppes if you just A-move. Also I think the lack of LOSB actually make it more friendly to the attacker since they never really have to worry what is in front of them before the ramp. This may be intended and I don't know if it is better or worse, but that is my impression.
|
|
|
your Country52797 Posts
Things go *bump* in the morning 0oooo
|
your Country52797 Posts
|
If you are going to submit this to the contest I would recommend you to texture the map.
Many of the expansions have weird places for geisers and minerals. There is little space to place turrets or cannons behind the mineral lines.
The random doodads do not fit at all.
The layout looks promising though.
|
your Country52797 Posts
@Dudemeister: I will be texturing the map. I, however, do not see what you are talking about when you say the minerals and geysers are in odd locations. Can you elaborate?
Space behind mineral lines:
Main: Barely not enough, will fix.
Nat: I will fix that.
Third: Ran out of room there xD, will fix
Fourth, It's like that to encourage harrassment/control of the ridge.
Semi-island and gold: Plenty of space.
|
The map is way too open in my opinion. And what is up with the sides not being identical?
|
your Country52797 Posts
On October 23 2011 02:33 Mashmed wrote:
The map is way too open in my opinion.
Play on it maybe? It's actually not very open.
And what is up with the sides not being identical?
WHAT
|
On October 23 2011 02:42 TehTemplar wrote:
On October 23 2011 02:33 Mashmed wrote:
The map is way too open in my opinion.
Play on it maybe? It's actually not very open.
And what is up with the sides not being identical?
WHAT
http://i.imgur.com/DmSol.jpg
|
I really like it! if this would replace xelnaga caverns that would be awesome! also is there an anylizer to this? also is there any way that you could add a base on each side? i'm not reall that pro-macro-zerg but i do see that 4 base will not allow zerg to get that endgame huge advantage. I play toss and i like the way this looks, but i've always been wary of maps that contain a set base for each player. I'm not gonna say change it last minute, but if it gets picked is there any way of making 2 different areas of spawning so that early game rushes are only 50/50 and not 100/100 on accurate attacks early game?
|
your Country52797 Posts
On October 23 2011 06:43 Mashmed wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 02:42 TehTemplar wrote:
On October 23 2011 02:33 Mashmed wrote:
The map is way too open in my opinion.
Play on it maybe? It's actually not very open.
And what is up with the sides not being identical?
WHAT http://i.imgur.com/DmSol.jpg
Hey, nobody's perfect 
I have no idea how I'm going to fix that...
I really like it! if this would replace xelnaga caverns that would be awesome! also is there an anylizer to this? also is there any way that you could add a base on each side? i'm not reall that pro-macro-zerg but i do see that 4 base will not allow zerg to get that endgame huge advantage. I play toss and i like the way this looks, but i've always been wary of maps that contain a set base for each player. I'm not gonna say change it last minute, but if it gets picked is there any way of making 2 different areas of spawning so that early game rushes are only 50/50 and not 100/100 on accurate attacks early game?
Xel'naga caverns: Can we not have more than 1 2 player map?
Anyway, Xel'naga caverns is better than: All the season 3 maps except Abyssal, and backwater gulch. I'd rather remove those maps and add more 2 player maps in for more diversity and to provide a wide variety of strategies. (Oh god I sound like DB)
Analyzer:  I'm afraid not, but I can test the map and tell you the rush distances (4.0-4.1 (not 4.2, it's slightly longer) are near the end of page 2 of this thread)
Extra base: That would make 14, which I consider a bit much for a 2 player map.
Here, you can see the general opinion of people that view page 3 of this thread.
Poll: 14 bases on 2 player maps?Yes! (8) 67% No! (2) 17% I'm not sure, it needs more testing. (2) 17% 12 total votes Your vote: 14 bases on 2 player maps? (Vote): Yes!
(Vote): No!
(Vote): I'm not sure, it needs more testing.
4 base zerg: Well, a semi-island's close by, and 5 base zerg is pretty good, and the 5th (semi-island) protects the 4th in a cool way.
"wary of maps that contain a set base for each player. I'm not gonna say change it last minute, but if it gets picked is there any way of making 2 different areas of spawning so that early game rushes are only 50/50 and not 100/100 on accurate attacks early game?"
I don't quite understand what you're saying here, but from what I gather you want me to make it into a 4 player map (bad idea). Let me know if I am misunderstanding this part.
|
your Country52797 Posts
OP updated with information about the map, basically the dimensions and rush distance.
|
Why would you add even more bases? oO
There's no real concept in the expansion layout as it is.
EDIT: Ok I really gotta say this now. It's cool if people support mapmakers with feedback and encourage them etc. but if you go over top with stuff like "this should replace a ladder map" if the map is clearly pretty bad, that's a really nice thing to say but I'm afraid it also means that the creator will be satisfied with a map he really shouldn't be and that kinda hinders his progression in mapmaking.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, I'd just like to see you get better at mapmaking and you just won't if you're happy with a product like this. Well yes you probably will eventually but for the fact that you've been around quite some time you should know better by now^^
Cheers and keep at it 
|
but if you go over top with stuff like "this should replace a ladder map" if the map is clearly pretty bad, that's a really nice thing to say but I'm afraid it also means that the creator will be satisfied with a map he really shouldn't be...
Ouch! The truth can hurt sometimes but it's always superior to fiction.
Aesthetically it is nowhere near Blizzard quality. It is clear that you have not put any work into this aspect of the map. It still might be the best balanced map around but I don't think it is worth submitting to the competition unless some effort has been put in to making it look good. Otherwise it will just seem lazy.
Balance wise... I am not a grand master/pro so what I have to say is only my noobish impressions. So take this part with a grain of salt.
It seems to me that the expansion lay out is set in stone. As the game goes on it will turn into a battle of left vs right. Especially considering that once the third is set up the 4th base comes essentially free (having an army positioned near your 3rd automatically protects your 4th) and the 5th IS a free expansion. I think that would lead to stale game play.
|
your Country52797 Posts
|
your Country52797 Posts
On October 23 2011 15:43 turtles wrote:Show nested quote +but if you go over top with stuff like "this should replace a ladder map" if the map is clearly pretty bad, that's a really nice thing to say but I'm afraid it also means that the creator will be satisfied with a map he really shouldn't be... Ouch! The truth can hurt sometimes but it's always superior to fiction. Aesthetically it is nowhere near Blizzard quality. It is clear that you have not put any work into this aspect of the map. It still might be the best balanced map around but I don't think it is worth submitting to the competition unless some effort has been put in to making it look good. Otherwise it will just seem lazy. Balance wise... I am not a grand master/pro so what I have to say is only my noobish impressions. So take this part with a grain of salt. It seems to me that the expansion lay out is set in stone. As the game goes on it will turn into a battle of left vs right. Especially considering that once the third is set up the 4th base comes essentially free (having an army positioned near your 3rd automatically protects your 4th) and the 5th IS a free expansion. I think that would lead to stale game play.
Fourth is easily harrassed from the semi-island. This is a map of heavy harrassment which favors counter-attacks in the lategame.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On July 08 2011 09:32 EternalSC wrote:
rename it Steppes of Gore
since that would be cool as hell
Ok.
Steppes of Gore version 2.0:
+ Show Spoiler +
Fixes from Steppes of Bore:
The third and 4th are now separate.
The map has a concept.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Er, comments please? :o
Completely different map now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Dwenb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/A7onx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JwsWd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tf6CR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OFK2D.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pcHiX.jpg)
Massive update!
