|
Here is another Map, i tried to use the Tarsonis tileset from Starcraft1. I think it turned out okish. Layout is pretty standard, tried to avoid circly syndrom and added a cute backdoor path to let the worker expand easir to the fourth ^.^
There is a possibility to add rocks on the natural bridge, im open for ideas.
General:
+ Show Spoiler +Texture: Costum
Playable: 136x104
Expands: 10
Xel'Naga: 2
Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
AnalyzerOverview:
+ Show Spoiler +
Analyzer:
+ Show Spoiler +
Pictures:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Thats a one-mineral field wall? so the choke is 1 square wide? Whats the idea - expand or sneaky atk path?
|
Aesthetics look so oldschool and cool, good job! 
Space management seems rly good in this map and overall the proportions feel quite nice.
With the size and 10 expansions only I'm a bit worried about this map's lategame potential tho. Imo Daybreak has shown that we should go in the other direction and make maps a bit bigger.
|
intersting how taking third is harder than taking third. while the map split scenario is the same whatever third you take, it seems intersting enough. nice pathwork or in general the central layout. really promising. the only let-down in my opinion is that there are no alternative map split scenarios and the kinda low number of bases.
DRs instead of the mineral block would provide a more agressive play. did you decide against the rocks to make 2 base pushes at the beackdoor less a problem?
wall-in options are kinda meh :/ rocks? could you provide some insight in how you think army positioning will develop between two and four bases?
|
I like the map, not a lot of playable maps of that size but i think you have pulled it off nicely. I might even like the mineral blocks for once. I'm curious to see how the very narrow path plays out, if it become a balance issue and how players deal with it.
@samro
I dont agree taking third is harder then taking third. Taking third is exactly as difficult as taking third.
|
sorry, but what is this mineral wall for? i really dont understand it, is it to make a little backdoor if it gets mined out, or what? ive never seen that before.
|
Very nice, the mineral patch in places like that has always been a cool idea
|
On December 21 2011 22:13 Meltage wrote:
Thats a one-mineral field wall? so the choke is 1 square wide? Whats the idea - expand or sneaky atk path?
its 2 square wide, and the idea is just to reduce the path for the worker to build the next expantion. if you want to use it as sneaky attack path, that works too but can be easily blocked by a building
On December 21 2011 22:13 Ragoo wrote:Aesthetics look so oldschool and cool, good job! Space management seems rly good in this map and overall the proportions feel quite nice. With the size and 10 expansions only I'm a bit worried about this map's lategame potential tho. Imo Daybreak has shown that we should go in the other direction and make maps a bit bigger.
maybe...i think its big enough
On December 22 2011 00:23 Samro225am wrote:
intersting how taking third is harder than taking third. while the map split scenario is the same whatever third you take, it seems intersting enough. nice pathwork or in general the central layout. really promising. the only let-down in my opinion is that there are no alternative map split scenarios and the kinda low number of bases.
DRs instead of the mineral block would provide a more agressive play. did you decide against the rocks to make 2 base pushes at the beackdoor less a problem?
wall-in options are kinda meh :/ rocks? could you provide some insight in how you think army positioning will develop between two and four bases?
just talking about the rocks on bridge, i originally had them on the bridge for easier natural but tanks can reach the gas from behind the rocks so i removed them...now its more xelnaga style fe.
i see the gameplay evolve around both highgrounds and split attacks on both fourth.
On December 22 2011 04:01 KoBlades wrote:
sorry, but what is this mineral wall for? i really dont understand it, is it to make a little backdoor if it gets mined out, or what? ive never seen that before.
yes thats right
|
United States10548 Posts
looks like a very solid map. decently hard to take third.
really like the neutral mineral patches.
|
I really like your maps. I know that another one of yours is only uploaded on EU, but what about this map. I love maps with little mineral blocks (even if it isn't that big of a deal) and I really want to play this! :D
Great looking map.
|
but wouldnt these mineral walls be quite terran favored, because of mules mining them out much faster? and are these minerals normally sized (2000 mins to mine) or are they smaller? if they are small like only 500 mins, i think it wouldnt be as bad because of the mules (they would still mine out faster but the difference wouldnt be as bad i think). or am i missing something that would make this balanced?
All in all, i like your map, not only the aesthetics but also the layout looks very interesting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9pgiw.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/K2PArl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/36qDQl.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Sc7hzl.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/T0iuyl.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1wEoZl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/29m81l.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jGlUIl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7tlvPl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zhdo3l.jpg)
