|
On October 31 2011 19:31 Zelniq wrote:
zerg's nightmare. too narrow/cramped, particularly the strip running down the center. considerably more difficult than say Crossfire SE which also similarly had so many chokes/narrow passageways. but the long map architecture helped a lot for creating space and making counterattacks very effective. this map looks much harder to do that.
there are only 2 wide open areas on the map that aren't even key positions and are avoidable.
Definitely agree counter-attacks could be good on this map but i don't like all the Chokes 
This map Reminds me of the new GSL map! By JackyPrime so many Chokes and Ramps!!!!
JackyPrimes map has like a Billion Counter-Attack Paths though
|
This looks like a very interesting and dynamic map! I love the concept of multiple ways to split the map. Seems like a pretty fair map in terms of races and play styles, too; a short enough rush distance for various early pressure builds to work, an easily taken nat and a couple options for a quick third that rely on strong map control... I'm no expert theory crafter, but my untrained eyes like what they see. It's a very aesthetically pleasing map, too. Great job!
|
United States10500 Posts
who's back? sexy's back (AKA ProdiG!!!)
interesting backdoor gold, and since the 4th is going to be so close to the gold, will be interesting to see what kind of battles materialize.
|
Looks like a really nice map, though idk how i feel about the narrow high ground seperating it. Seems ridic easy for a Terran to set up a line of tanks on it ;\ but i do hope it gets a chance to be played a lot
|
|
|
Fuck yeah prodiG you are the best! : )
And you love big mains, eh?^^
|
On November 01 2011 04:01 prodiG wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 03:50 Paladia wrote:
Can't terran just easily defend the third by having siege tanks in their main? The natural also seems quite easily defended by siege tanks.
Overall, the map seems quite Terran-favored, which is the opposite of what you want with the current state of the game. tanks would splash all of their own stuff, you would reach much farther than where the CC would be placed. lings in the mineral line for example would get hit by tanks and splash the scv's that the lings are attacking. The idea here is that the lowground third expansion is easier to take than backdooring out to the gold and taking an expansion that would spread you that much more thinly. You can take the lowground third and if you're holding the xel'naga tower next to your gold expansion you will have a pretty easy time spotting huge incoming backdoor flanks
Well, that siege tanks can splash their own stuff while defending an expansion is in my opinion a mute point as that can always happen regardless of placement. What is notable is that the siege tanks can defend it while not being attacked themselves. As you can lift off the expansion, it makes it almost unkillable for Zerg and Protoss unless they want to stand and attack it whilst being in siege fire.
This could be solved by placing some empty space behind the third that siege tanks cannot be placed upon, such as on Crevasse.
I may of course be wrong and the map is completely balanced but on first sight it does look favorable for Terran.
|
On November 01 2011 19:41 Ragoo wrote:
Fuck yeah prodiG you are the best! : )
And you love big mains, eh?^^
Yes. I've never felt that the standard main size was quite big enough and it's definitely something that we've talked about internally a lot. A main the size of the mains on Tal'Darim Altar should be the absolute bare minimum imo
|
I don't like it, I would never feel totally safe unless I had both XWTs and there are periods of time where you simply don't have that. I understand that you didn't want to go with standard, albeit pretty map, but if I had to choose between Daybreak and this, Daybreak would win every single time, or any current GSL/MLG map
|
|
|
thx for the writeup Barrin, pleasure to read as always ^_^
As far as map control is concerned, I wanted it to be hard to lock down your entire side of the map really easily. As usual I'll be sure to keep your concerns in mind as the general openness of the map seems to be a concern of a lot of people.
Let's start a bit of a discussion then. If you were to open certain areas of the map up a bit more, where would they be?
|
The chokes into the gold expansion could be made larger, as well as the chokes into the 11 o'clock and 5 o'clock expansions. Just a little bit, like one ramp size larger. Those areas seem to stick out the most to me though.
|
|
|
You have good taste in music sir, great taste in maps as well. I love the atmosphere that your maps have.
|
On November 02 2011 07:49 Barrin wrote:Ya sorry I meant to add that the lack of ways to attain/assert map control is probably part of this map's concept and is therefore plenty good. Especially because you meant to do it  I suppose I meant more for people to see it and that you usually shouldn't do it. But on this map is fine.
Yeah. One of the core ideas of the map is that you should constantly be under pressure to attack and/or defend and there should rarely be a dull moment.
On November 02 2011 08:11 Ulfsark wrote:
You have good taste in music sir, great taste in maps as well. I love the atmosphere that your maps have.
If you think I have good taste in music you must as well glad you like it!
|
|
|
Do you think it's problematic that you can warp into the backdoor area from a pylon at the nat? It would be impossible to stop a 4gate from getting highground vision if they have two entrances.
|
On January 05 2012 11:03 Gfire wrote:
Do you think it's problematic that you can warp into the backdoor area from a pylon at the nat? It would be impossible to stop a 4gate from getting highground vision if they have two entrances.
Yes and no, the map is sort of designed in such a way that if you lose control of that space you're in a lot of trouble. There's no denying this map is very punishing for mistakes in PvP. It can be dealt with by playing very carefully and doing builds that make sure you end up in control of your natural expansion so stuff like that doesn't happen, but for those who opt for more passive builds and get caught off guard by something like a well-hidden 4gate... I predict a lot of salt from those guys. PvP is such a volatile matchup that adaptability to both the map and your opponent is absolutely necessary and this map is no exception to that.
|
To me it seems like Siege tanks and Pylons will be very powerful harassment tools. You can build a pylon above the destructible rocks on the west or east side and do a warp in and walk directly into the main. With tanks and medivac support you could besiege the natural from the low ground VERY EASILY. Otherwise, I like the high number of expansions and all of the odd attack routes.
|
On January 05 2012 11:42 NinjaBeast wrote:
To me it seems like Siege tanks and Pylons will be very powerful harassment tools. You can build a pylon above the destructible rocks on the west or east side and do a warp in and walk directly into the main. With tanks and medivac support you could besiege the natural from the low ground VERY EASILY. Otherwise, I like the high number of expansions and all of the odd attack routes.
You can't warp in over the rocks like that (I think I posted a screenshot of exactly why elsewhere). The tank and medivac combo you describe is one of many ways the natural expansion can be harassed should your backdoor be taken like that.
Before a flock of nerds comes out of nowhere and scream imba because we've seen this on Lost Temple, I've seen things like this work in the past. (2) Leviathan by Boomstevo is a perfect example of how you can harass the natural but it can still be countered easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/U28IX.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MvilL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bY4xi.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SjBpZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/txnyu.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YYxuj.jpg)
