| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Exigaet
Canada355 Posts
On March 09 2012 12:39 Zariel wrote: Did you know that if you switched the ramps around a bit, it will be balanced for any spawn position?? I dunno how to explain it better but give it rotational symmetry for the bases This is not made to be a rotational symmetrical map at all. | ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
 love the theme haha! | ||
|
Pocky52
United States463 Posts
Perhaps because of the base density, it just seems overly cramped. I think that it would be better with 14 bases, which still allows for a significant number of bases to be taken, since honestly if both get to 7 bases, the game should end soon... Even though there are 4 possible spawns, it is essentially a 2 spawn map, and I simply feel that 8 a player is too much... On the same note, the expansions that do exist are very small and cramped... the 4 middle bases provide nearly no space surrounding the actual expansion. Those platforms need to be expanded or altered. As I mentioned above, I think it would be even beneficial to remove some, and perhaps replace them with Xel'Naga Watch towers such that there are 2 rather than 4. Currently the towers seem to cover too much area, a better coverage area is like 20-25% however there are maps with no towers that are highly looked upon as well, so don't feel obligated to have so many towers. Like I said earlier, this really should be treated as a 2 spawn map, and 4 towers seems like over doing that. Beyond the actual tightness of those expansions, the rest of the map seems very closed and tight as well. Do not confuse this with chokey, because although this map is quite chokey, probably even too much so, more importantly it creates areas that are quite inaccessible. like many others have said, the cliffs simply limit the pathing in a way that trekking from certain areas to others can be quite a long distance, which can be bad for gameplay... One way to address this I think is the removal of the pathing rocks... while I'm not a blatant rock hater, and think that they are very good in certain cases, I don't think that this is it, and I think their removal here would be beneficial. I think that reducing the sizes of the chasms/abysses at the 2/8 positions by the expansion would also provide that expansion with some "breathing room". On somewhat of a sidenote, I think that the rocks at the one third should be removed as well, since it really isn't that easy to take, since by ground it is quite a ways from the natural. I think that rock blocked thirds must be much more accessible to warrant the rocks and those simply aren't in my opinion. If you want to increase the difficulty in taking that third perhaps you could take out the small cliff that creates the double choke, as that would significantly open up the map, which I think would be good. There is an alternative third presented by the other base anyways, so regardless the taking of a third would not be too difficult to one race or another. Lastly, I would like to point out that the use of horizontal and vertical ramps is generally frowned upon. Some maps are hinged upon their inclusion, which I think is bad, but luckily this map is not, and I think with small changes they could be removed, while creating a better "flow" in general. Do not take these criticisms wrongly, I think this is a great map, but it definitely has great potential to be developed. While I only provide suggestions, I strongly advise you to consider them, and come up with some of your own solutions. This is a fantastic first entry, and regardless of what you decide to do with this, look forward to seeing your future work! The aesthetics, concept, and theme are great! | ||
|
Exigaet
Canada355 Posts
An easy way to setup mineral field and gas geyser layouts is to put down a CC/Nexus/Hatch and put the 8 mineral fields/2 gas geysers around it in an optimal way. | ||
|
iceman8711
United States14 Posts
You're right, my minerals are pretty cramped compared to the pro-maps. It took me a while to discover the "placement grid" but now that I'm using it I'll redo all the mineral lines and try and make them comprable to Metalopolis or Tal'Darim @Pocky52 Now that I'm directly comparing my map to some of the other 4 maps, your comments are definitely hitting home. Would you recommend that I map some protrusions from the main square shape of the map, extend the boundaries a little bit, in order to open up? I've eliminated the expo at the goals and replaced it with a small platform for two Xel'Naga towers now, so hopefully that will clear up stadium entrance cramps. I've also reduced the negative space at the 9 and 3 expos which is helping some with the openness. I haven't published those changes yet, but they'll probably go live tonight. @ClysmiC I can't believe I put the wrong title on the thread. It has been fixed, thanks for the heads up I'm trying to ease some of the power of Siege tanks by giving paths for easy surrounds and having alternate paths if one area gets too locked down. Hypothetically, other map features should balance it out but I'll have to see some replays eventually to know if its too exploitable. @TheFish7 Thanks for letting me know what XWT meant. Even the Custom Map guidelines just said "This is self-explanatory" so I felt like a bit of a nub. I have opened up those thirds you mentioned and non-pathed the building in front of them, very good advice. I was figuring that the high ground would be one of Terran's ways for compensating their fairly slow armies on such a large map. There are also enough avenues of attack that holding any given cliff should only be a minor setback to an attacking army, or at least that's my hope. @EatThePath I moved the supply depots to the other side of the ramp, thanks for pointing that out. I wanted more ramps into the center of the field, and I even made a branch of my map where I put those in but it ended up shrinking the field so dramatically that the entire stadium would have to be enlarged to have the same size field, meaning the road ring would have to be narrowed which would create a lot of chokes. On v0.11 I added some ramps to the XWTs to make them more vulnerable, but the next release is going to move the XWTs to where the goal area expos currently are. Thank you for your advice though, I'm definitely working on ways to improve accessibility to the stadium middle and high ground. Thank you everybody else for the wonderful comments and feedback! In the day since release, I've already learned a ton more about map making. Feel free to try the map out and send me replays or casts, and if you allow I'll include links in the main post. | ||
|
sAyMole
Korea (South)35 Posts
Great work. | ||
|
iceman8711
United States14 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Obe7Q.jpg) *Edit* Posted! | ||
|
iceman8711
United States14 Posts
Thank you everybody for all of the great feedback, I can't wait to submit my next map . | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
Akinokaze
Australia326 Posts
| ||
|
Faya
France24 Posts
| ||
|
Sinedd
Poland7052 Posts
 | ||
|
Promethelax
Canada7089 Posts
I like the realistic urban setting, it makes this feel like a place in which a battle for control of a city might actually occur. great job! | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16071 Posts
They're very narrow and its very easy to misclick to either side of them causing your units to run forward instead of away which can slaughter your forces easily. Im thinking it might just be a wiser idea to remove the high ground pathing in the middle altogether and adopt a more open middle. | ||
|
Faya
France24 Posts
| ||
|
EnderSC
62 Posts
Have you tried having a bit more access to the center high grounds (terraces)? From Road and/or field... It's might be too exploitable against Zerg if tanks establish there or deathballs move through there... Contrarywise, Zerg potentially have 3 separate lanes to work with. Dont know. what do you think? Edit: oh sorry this has been covered. Good Job Iceman | ||
|
RJGooner
United States2060 Posts
Great job. | ||
|
MaV_gGSC
Canada1345 Posts
| ||
|
Pocky52
United States463 Posts
Edit: with the suggestion I posted above, the seating area would probably be unpathable. Another thing is I know that this was already mentioned in the oppsite way, but your mineral/resource lay out could use some minor fixes, like at the 9 and 3 expos, the minerals are too spread out, and on the natural I think it was one of the gases looks a little off... Regardless, this is much improved and I must praise your work, this looks awesome, and I will definitely test it out some! | ||
|
iceman8711
United States14 Posts
| ||
| ||
FEL
Cracow 2025
Spirit vs GeraldLIVE!
Clem vs TBD
uThermal vs TBD
Reynor vs TBD
Lambo vs TBD
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
