[M] (2) Scorching Dawn - Page 2

lovablemikey

264 Posts

December 14 2011 02:13 GMT

#21

You, sir, win the grand prize. I must say, I have never been happier to see a new map. Look at that! There are expansions in the center, and you made it look good! I can't see anything about this map that I don't like. The layout is superb; it flows perfectly. The size is just right; it isn't too big or too small. The tileset is used well. Holy crap, I love it!

Even though everyone knows this is the best map ever, it's time to test it out! I, for one, will be giving it a whirl tonight. It looks so good that the only way to know what to change will come from watching games on it.

Kudos on a map well made! It's easily among my favorites of all time already. I hope this style catches on, because it's been time for a change for a while now.

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 14 2011 06:37 GMT

#22

Thanks everyone for the positive feedback thus far. The complaints I have received with the current version so far are that the map is too dark, looks a little too bland, and the mains are pretty tight for terran. Easy fixes at this point, as they're mostly aesthetically. However I probably won't get around to dealing with them until the end of the week, thus continue play testing it as is for now. More feedback is always welcome, good or bad

Deshkar

Singapore1244 Posts

December 14 2011 06:50 GMT

#23

I totally love the look and layout of the map! You've been a great addition to the map-making community!

eTcetRa

Australia822 Posts

December 14 2011 08:16 GMT

#24

Excellent map mate. Layout and visuals look incredible and love the bases in middle.

Sirion

131 Posts

December 14 2011 10:19 GMT

#25

I like most of the map, except for one thing: the center. Let me elaborate. The center of this map truly is the center of this map. If you manage to park a big army there that dramatically increases your chance of winning in a late game situation. No matter where your opponent has his army you can threaten one of his bases and have a relative short path for defense. That means you can expand more easily, in a case of a strong backstab along the other lanes you can just walk to his main.

So why is this a problem? There is only one center as opposed to two staging points, one for each player. I am afraid that this then promotes deathball play, with a big clash in the middle and the winner of that fight takes the center and then the game. Which sounds boring and does not live up the the potential of this map. The problem is, I have no idea how to fix this. The center of the map is just there, its not like you can move some stuff a little bit and it disappears. Perhaps it is not even such a big deal, but in my experience maps with a strong center position produce boring games.

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 14 2011 10:53 GMT

#26

I can kind of understand what you are saying, but to a minor degree. Where I do see you're point, I rarely think the middle will actually be the middle as you describe, simply due to player expansion patterns. The middle would only be the middle in a scenario where both players take the middle expansion as their 4ths. However, in each match up, there is usually one player who expands toward their opponent and one who expands away. Thus, both middle bases won't be mining at the same time, or else one player is at a serious disadvantage. For example, in pvz, if both the protoss and the zerg took the middle expansion as their 4th, the zerg would most likely lose the game. Too easy for toss to abuse the fact that the zerg expanded toward them. Wouldn't be hard for an immobile protoss army to go from their 4th to the zergs 4th, and the zerg wouldn't have much reaction time. So what I'm essentially saying is that the focus points late game really depend on where each player takes their 4th.

However I could very well be wrong. We can speculate all day, but it really comes down to play testing the map to see where things stand.

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 16 2011 05:18 GMT

#27

Map updated and published for version 1.1

IronManSC

United States2119 Posts

December 21 2011 07:24 GMT

#28

Timetwister, I don't know if you came up with this layout solely by yourself or if you even did the texture work all by yourself (I'm just spit-balling and thinking ESV helped you a lot), but I have to say this map is starting to look extremely gorgeous ^^

mangoloid

100 Posts

December 21 2011 09:24 GMT

#29

I like the map a lot, though I am struggling to imagine games beyond 3-base play. How about adding rocks on the ramp between the high ground 4th/5th and the opposite low-ground base? I feel like that would split the expansions on the map more naturally and would make expanding beyond 3 bases less difficult. Although, doing that, you might have to take out the mid-map 4th/5th because, by securing that, a player would secure the high ground as well. Hmm. I'm no longer sure that suggestion is any good, but I would like to hear your thoughts.

Also, I am curious about the high-ground arm extending into the 3rd. Is that so players can have a high ground advantage when attacking the 3rd? It looks siege-able. And a good place for pylon harass. I don't know if that makes it more or less assault-able than a wider choke. I don't really get it.

FoxyMayhem

624 Posts

December 21 2011 09:46 GMT

#30

If you know how to do any texture editing, can I suggest you hue shift that low-ground reddish texture (marking paths) away from purple and closer toward an orange. Right now it clashes with the other textures on the map really, really bad.

IronManSC

United States2119 Posts

December 21 2011 19:45 GMT

#31

One of my older maps, Antiga Prime:
[image loading]

For months i've been told to fix the center highground 3rds and I finally got around to doing it, and churned out this:
+ Show Spoiler +

So...similar...lol

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 21 2011 20:11 GMT

#32

IronMan, I swear this is coincidence :/ The idea of this layout came from Havens, as I really loved how the fourth was in front of the 3rd. The rest just happened from there.

Though, I would say this isn't the first time I've seen two mapmakers come up with nearly identical map layouts. Plexa gave me these examples a while back when he showed me RoV from broodwar and compared it to Havens. Funny enough, these comparisons also include Antiga Prime, though what seems to be a different version of the map.

+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +

EDIT: had broken spoiler

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 21 2011 20:22 GMT

#33

On December 21 2011 18:24 mangoloid wrote:
I like the map a lot, though I am struggling to imagine games beyond 3-base play. How about adding rocks on the ramp between the high ground 4th/5th and the opposite low-ground base? I feel like that would split the expansions on the map more naturally and would make expanding beyond 3 bases less difficult. Although, doing that, you might have to take out the mid-map 4th/5th because, by securing that, a player would secure the high ground as well. Hmm. I'm no longer sure that suggestion is any good, but I would like to hear your thoughts.

Also, I am curious about the high-ground arm extending into the 3rd. Is that so players can have a high ground advantage when attacking the 3rd? It looks siege-able. And a good place for pylon harass. I don't know if that makes it more or less assault-able than a wider choke. I don't really get it.

Yeah, I don't think rocks would do. I kind of want that high ground base to be a viable 5th from both the middle 4th and the 4th along the main. I may just have to space them out better, but test games that I've played haven't really given to any issues as of yet.

As far as the 3rd extension, it just makes it harder to hold your 3rd. The base itself is not siegable, but a geyser is. Also, I loved how in PvZ roaches, hydras, etc could assault the protoss's wall from the high ground, must like Korhal Compound. Both reasons contribute to the concept of encouraging multi-prong attacks.

FlaShFTW

United States10574 Posts

December 21 2011 21:13 GMT

#34

I love this map. Was it your intention to allow shelling of the third with that extended high ground?

Looks like a great map though!

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 22 2011 07:14 GMT

#35

Well, the base itself cannot be shelled, but it was intended to allow a gas and the potential wall to be shelled from the high ground. Just playing test games on it at the moment, and also reconsidering aesthetics.

IronManSC

United States2119 Posts

December 22 2011 18:14 GMT

#36

It's okay timetwister, yours is basically a better, updated version (also prettier).

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

December 24 2011 23:17 GMT

#37

Updated for 1.4
-Changed lighting and fixed texturing bugs
-Fixed a few pathing and doodad bugs
-No layout changes

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

January 06 2012 09:50 GMT

#38

Updated for 2.2
-Huge aesthetics update. Finally settled on something I like a lot.
-Slightly changed a few of the chokes in the middle and at the third.

Removed ESV tag. Now version 2.0

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

[M] (2) Scorching Dawn - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming