|
On January 09 2012 05:03 Antares777 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2012 04:57 a176 wrote:So i have to ask a serious question. Does ESV communicate at all when making maps? Or do you guys just make maps and add an ESV tag to them? Because this map here, and this map, and this map, and this map are basically all the same map. Yes yes, there are slight differences in the terrain and base positions, but lets be honest here, its not really enough to differentiate them all from each other. What? I see some similarities, but those all play out very differently. Totally different maps.
Yeah, all but the first have a pretty different layout. There's only so much you can do with 2 spawn points (that we know of....) before you start making maps that have such an overwhelming advantage for a race.
With that being said, I do think that the OP map, and the first map listed by a176 are pretty similar, along with a few other 2p maps that have appeared recently. This is pretty common, not just in map making, but being creative in general. People have to let map makers make similar maps until they can refine the technique of a new layout until it becomes something different.
Think map making like writing music - at first you pretty much compose what you've heard until you have a grasp of all the techniques already being used. After that, you will start to see that your style of composing will start to differ from others, even those that influence you, because now you understand the technique.
It's kind of a hard concept to understand if you're not already someone who does map making, draws, composes music, or anything else at a deeper level than most, but in time, we will see this template of 2p maps disappear, and another one will take its place.
|
On February 04 2012 06:14 EatThePath wrote:I'm liking ulaan grunge + grass textures with the additional decorating.  So Gwen, I'm also working on a map with no towers, and I want to ask you if you feel you have to make special dispensation for that. How did it work out here? Does it favour one race over another? Depending on the builds maybe? Should SC2 maps always try to have towers, because the game is better with them, or is it just an option and we haven't well explored the choice not to use them? I'm looking for a general view on the issue to help me understand my own map better, and also a more specific answer about what it means on Brineclaw. I'm going to go watch replays now to see how the players position their armies and if they are scouting more actively to compensate for lack of towers. (This is the biggest thing I've noticed.)
A map with no towers is really hard to work with. Some feedback include (from memory):
"It feels as if the terran player disappears when they move out." (from a zerg perspective).
But that was the first zvt played on the map. I think it works out more or less evenly. Zerg gets to play overlords on top of cliffs and see drops earlier while terran can scan and kill the ovies much like in bw. Toss has observers which isn't too big of a deal but the pvp matchup on this match is something I want to keep an eye on because of the lack of scouting options available. Honestly if the map is done right, with paths that each have their own advantage and disadvantages, in this case having a safe attack route to the third vs being able to cut the third from the main / nat, then I don't think having no XWTs is that bad. SC2 player *may* be a bit spoiled from XWTs doing the scouting for them. This map plays like a bw map in terms of scouting.
As for what it means specifically on Brineclaw:
Zergs need to place their ovies on the cliffs carefully.
Terrans might want to spend energy snipe the ovies in order to make drops less detectable.
Toss has colossi and obersvers past the midgame so any ovies zerg has are going to be essentially dead.
Zerg needs to have lings EVERYWHERE (this is actually pretty damn cool and fun to play with).
Terran needs to use a bit more scans.
Toss observer options are a bit more powerful.
By all means watch the replays I'm sure you'll enjoy them.
|
This seems like an improved version of Daybreak that will encourage a little bit more early game aggression as opposed to 99% passive games, since the linear 3rd is more difficult to hold.
I like it - hope to see it in some tourneys.
|
quite a nice map. I think this map has nothing very special, it looks like a "normal" map.
solid work!!
|
Have you had any difficulties with zerg armies being forcefielded out of their third base? The single space ramp seems like it would strongly play into that. It also seems like it would be very easy for a protoss to defend their third against roaches in the same way.
|
On February 05 2012 00:08 XenoX101 wrote:
Have you had any difficulties with zerg armies being forcefielded out of their third base? The single space ramp seems like it would strongly play into that. It also seems like it would be very easy for a protoss to defend their third against roaches in the same way.
On the test game (replay is posted) the toss went for forge fe while z was the aggressive one. The other zvp played on the map didn't really touch on the issue too hard (as in strategies didn't revolve around abusing it) but it is a strong tactic on the map. It's balanced out a little because Z can place Ovies on the cliffs and see the toss army move out if they're good at spreading ovies and positioning their army.
Toss defending their third base with wall off and sentries (mutas might be a good option) is definitely a thing (it happens in the replay posted) but zerg has more mobility and can sometimes catch the toss off guard. A lot of the map revolves around strategic positioning and a flanking. If the third is being abused too hard I'll make some changes but I need to get in some more games first. If you have time give it a try and tell me what you think.
|
After some feedback the choke created by the third and central base has been widened by one hex:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UW7Iu.jpg)
|
i think it's rally good but somehow i think the xel naga towers are kind of useless ^^!
|
On February 08 2012 19:35 ntssauce wrote:
i think it's rally good but somehow i think the xel naga towers are kind of useless ^^!
You mean adding XWTs won't add anything to the map or that the map's nonexistent towers are making it better?
|
I like the map a lot. It looks a bit 2 basey to me especially for protoss. But that's not necessarily the end of the world. Cloud Kingdom's a bit like that too, not quite as much though. I don't think these layouts are unoriginal and while lots of maps look similar, minor differences can be significant balance wise. Keep up the great work. I'll play this next time I custom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
