|
On September 09 2011 15:59 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 08:55 Meltage wrote:
@Sea_Food - thats very hard to say. Zerg imba is the hardest to spot I think. Do you have any more concrete argument why the map is zerg-favoured?
1. The map is very open. 2. Bunker rushing seems impossible on this map if any. 3. You could fit another map on the huge airspace behind mains. 4. Line of sight blockers EVERYWHERE. 5. So many attack paths, and with exeption of natural, you have to cover multiple paths more always when you take a base. 6. Extreme aumont of overlord highgrounds. 7. 14 base map. These are the ones that came to my mind atm.
2. I don't see that as a big problem and if he adds a reaperpath into the nat as I suggested, reaper bunker rushes will be fine.
3. I wouldn't call that Zerg feature, not every Zerg is going Mutas nowadays and Terran drops benefit from it as well
4. I don't see LoS EVERYWHERE, it's only really important at the watchtowers and there it's like the watchtowers on Tal'Darim on their little highground, or even like normal Shakuras where you can only go through the middle which is blocked nearly completely with LoS, imo no problem at all
5. I think it's quite easy to take another nat and main and then you have 4 bases, and then the other expansion route is towards your opponent and while the base that hugs your main is quite open the highground base after that is really nice for T/P... again I don't see the problem
6. The only significant places I see for overlords are in the airspace on the outside, the highround at the nat and the highground at the 6 and 12, other than that placing your Overlords on one of those highgrounds in the middle is suicidal, 4 can be spotted with watchtowers(again like Shakuras) and the other two are only important for cross position early game when you don't have air to kill them. Imo that's not a problem.
7. 14 bases is less than a 4 player rotational map has, which is 16, and just as much as Shakuras
I agree about 1, it is very open in the middle. There are ways to avoid going through the middle tho. But still, Meltage, you might want to look into that more.
|
On September 09 2011 19:36 Meltage wrote:
@Sea_Food - thanks for paoints you're brigning up. Those I need to consider and keep in mind when playtesting. I'm not sure that all of them are issues. Do you have any suggestion on changes? You could elaborate on 2 and 7 - why are those bad things?
2 and 7 are not bad, exept they are zerg favored features and in your map zerg really does not need them all.
I have a few ideas how could you make your map a little more reasonable vs zerg.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rdHZd.jpg)
|
Yeah I agree with Sea_Food, that's what I was trying to say before.
|
|
|
I think I agree that the mains should be extended into the air space somewhat. Mostly because I think the mains are small and have limited area to build in, though. The naturals have virtually no additional space for any buildings other than a wall-in, and the main is an awkward shape with a large perimeter relative to the area, so I feel it will be difficult to place a lot of buildings in the later stages of the game; in particular a lot of barracks. Although 28 CCs, the area in these mains can't be used very efficiently do to the shape.
|
I'm pretty sure I will extend the mains into the nat and I'm considering changing the forward nat ramp as Sea_Food and others have suggested.
I have already implemented the perfect suggestion from Ragoo - a reaper entrance at the nat backdoor:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/G8qNF.jpg)
Before:
+ Show Spoiler +
I probably wont do any more changes until NASL open has been played this weekend ( thread ). There will also be a second tournament one week after that.
In addition, TPW Overgorwn will be used in MotM 9 in the end of oct / beginning of nov.
All those games will hopefully give me some race win ratio and pro/grand master/master feedback 
|
Hey Melt, veeeery nice map. Love the "overgrown skycrapper" concept.
Wish I could give you more feedback on the balance front, but haven´t really laddered thus far.
|
@unjugon Glad you like! Played yet?
The OP has been updated with appearances:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Update
- Mains are slightly bigger now and the space added is behind the mineral lines.
- The small high grounds by the forward third and in between the nats were made slightly bigger to choke the area some more.
- The high ground between the nats is still pathable (droppable)
New detail images:
Mains
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rTZnf.jpg)
Middle and third area
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jwePi.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pwEXV.jpg)
|
This map has such a unique and beautiful style, I love it!
|
Map Update
- Waterfall doodads were removed, due to causing FPS drop (but not by much).
|
Ooo pretty. I would much rather play this than Shakuras Plateau.
|
United States10357 Posts
I like this better than shakuras, because if you take a quick third on shakuras and the opponent contains you, you have no way of saving your third unless you all-in counter.
however, this map as the "backdoor" so that if opponent tries to camp your outside ramp area, you still have a way of reinforcing your quick third.
This map > Shakuras Anyday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/g8nhN.jpg)
