EPTAnyone want to test out the 6 pool on the map?
[M] (2) Prophets Passage - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
Anyone want to test out the 6 pool on the map? | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
On May 01 2012 03:05 HypertonicHydroponic wrote: + Show Spoiler + While it would be cool, it's not actually as epic as in BW because you can shift queue the mining directly between the geyser and the minerals (I think the geyser building needs to finish before the shift queue back to the geyser is taken as a harvest command, but I could be wrong -- it's been a while since I've messed with it) like 5 times. So really, with just 30 conscutive clicks, you could mine out that whole wall and not even have to keep tabs on it while you built up your army, scouted, etc. Also, have you considered mineral patch stacking? Two mule trips and that wall is breached. If you want to force 5 trips per patch you should make them each 7 minerals or less (since they are high yield), then select them all, go to the object properties, and choose ignore placement restrictions. Then copy and paste the group directly over the first group 4 more times. This method will allow for a little more possibilty for "epic" plays since you could send 15 workers across the map and mine out the whole section in one fell swoop thereby creating a tense situation where the workers could be scouted and picked off before opening the hole. Anyway, just something to think about. I haven't considered mineral stacking at all actually. It's something else I could easily try out and see how I like it. Again, I'll be playing around with the amount of resources on the backdoor until hopefully it gets to a number that works. On May 01 2012 03:21 titanicnewbie wrote: + Show Spoiler + It seems to me you can fix the LOS blocker/mineral wall issue by turning one of the high ground pods into a pathable, buildable area with a ramp into the main. Then you could build a scout pylon or depot to keep an eye on the mineral wall. The enemy couldn't hurt it without a flying unit giving vision, which would negate the LOS blockers anyway. I also agree that it's going to be very hard to have 2 bases on this map. You're a genius. I like this idea a lot actually. Props! I didn't even think about that. I'll mess around with making one of those high ground pieces pathable and see how I like it. On May 01 2012 04:48 Heh_ wrote: + Show Spoiler + The map looks really nice and the idea behind the mineral-blocked backdoor is awesome, but there's a problem with the natural. The method you used to wall off is impractical: it's easy to roach/baneling bust and a single cannon doesn't cover all the mineral patches. I would suggest putting destructible rocks at the second entrance to the natural so the choke can be walled off without using the nexus. Another concern would be opponents taking the long path to get to the third, allowing easy siege of the natural. You might want to separate the third from the natural a bit more. True, although here's another way you could wall it off that would make it much safer against baneling/roach aggression. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SB9Db.jpg) Or you could also just wall off your main ramp, mine through the minerals and then block off the highground natural with 3 3x3 buildings. You'd then be able to keep at least 1 or 2 sentries at your main ramp to forcefield it off if needed. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FRwQa.jpg) As I've said Protoss Fast Expansions were probably my biggest concern on this map, mainly PvZ. I know mid and end game it'll be fine but yeah, I am a little worried about FE. Although, Dual Sight and XNC both had wiiide open naturals as well. On May 01 2012 07:00 thurst0n wrote: + Show Spoiler + "Space for 510 CC's" that is just hilarious! hahaha Anyone want to test out the 6 pool on the map? lol yeah...about that.  If you do some tests regarding 6 pools please feel free to post your results here. I'd love to read any additional feedback you may have. | ||
|
Yonnua
United Kingdom2331 Posts
On May 01 2012 07:25 SidianTheBard wrote: As I've said Protoss Fast Expansions were probably my biggest concern on this map, mainly PvZ. I know mid and end game it'll be fine but yeah, I am a little worried about FE. Although, Dual Sight and XNC both had wiiide open naturals as well. But both of those maps have been panned for pretty much that exact reason. | ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
On May 01 2012 07:49 Yonnua wrote: But both of those maps have been panned for pretty much that exact reason. Yeah that. I love this map aesthetically and other than this one point design-wise, but simply put I dont think it would be picked up if its so FFE unfriendly, whereas with a few tweaks I could see this being used in tournaments easily. | ||
|
Megakenny
Canada829 Posts
| ||
|
Heh_
Singapore2712 Posts
On May 01 2012 07:25 SidianTheBard wrote: True, although here's another way you could wall it off that would make it much safer against baneling/roach aggression. I don't really like this idea because the warp gate is soooo exposed. Roaches will take free potshots at it. As Yonnua said, maps with wide open naturals are frowned upon. In the ladder, the only map with a wide open natural is metalopolis. And that map was almost voted out, but there was shattered temple. I favor the style of metropolis: in other words, you can wall off from the ramp to the rocks (in a horizontal manner), with the other choke obstructed by another set of destructible rocks. | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
As for updates on the map, I'll be changing the minerals to most likely to 56, which will take 8 workers to mine through one field. That takes 24 seconds for those 8 workers to mine through it which should be plenty of extra time to get some extra units, a cannon, spine crawler or bunker up to defend against a 6 pool. Since I won't be able to map edit much tues/wed/thurs I've decided to do a small update to the map. These are the changes that will stay until at least friday. Enjoy! New version is up on NA. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nDfQe.jpg) Reasons for changes: + Show Spoiler + 56 minerals takes 8 workers to mine it out. Since each worker takes about 3 seconds to mine minerals that means to mine out 1 patch of minerals it'll take 24 seconds. 24 seconds is plenty of extra time to build up some more defense, especially early game. High ground pod helps the defender a lot. You can now place a unit or building up on the high ground pod to grant vision of the mineral wall so you can easily tell if they are mining away at it. It also helps because it looks over onto the lowground natural so it'll help defend it a little bit. Ramp moved closer to the low ground natural and the choke has been decreased a tiny bit to help protoss FE. | ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
 | ||
|
DYEAlabaster
Canada1009 Posts
The problem with the orginal Bel'Shir Beach was that it had a highground pod like this as well, but because of the lacking ramp and the way pvp worked out, it was a 4gate heaven. Imagine putting a pylon on the low ground, warping in units on the highground by sneaking a stalker there, and just... yeah. Highground pods like that don't work out when they overhang the mainramp/are within range of proxy pylons where there is no ramp  | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
Highground pod...I'll experiment with it. For the enemy to actually gain vision of that high ground pod they'll have to get a unit far into the enemy base to make it up that ramp. I suppose I could see warp prism play being a nightmare, especially with it having such a small ramp. We'll see, I might take it out in this next update because it probably won't be needed. | ||
|
DYEAlabaster
Canada1009 Posts
On May 05 2012 05:10 SidianTheBard wrote: I've actually got some pretty big changes to this map coming. I got some nice feedback by some high level players (Incontrol, plexa, etc etc) I just haven't been able to work on it too much the past couple days. Expect an update probably Saturday; Sunday at the latest. Highground pod...I'll experiment with it. For the enemy to actually gain vision of that high ground pod they'll have to get a unit far into the enemy base to make it up that ramp. I suppose I could see warp prism play being a nightmare, especially with it having such a small ramp. We'll see, I might take it out in this next update because it probably won't be needed. Good. Like I said, Bel'Shir Beach version 1 ---> highground pod nightmaretown | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 05 2012 04:41 DYEAlabaster wrote: Hey Sidian- that highground pod, don't do it! Please! The problem with the orginal Bel'Shir Beach was that it had a highground pod like this as well, but because of the lacking ramp and the way pvp worked out, it was a 4gate heaven. Imagine putting a pylon on the low ground, warping in units on the highground by sneaking a stalker there, and just... yeah. Highground pods like that don't work out when they overhang the mainramp/are within range of proxy pylons where there is no ramp That isn't why Bel'shir 1 was a 4gate heaven.. it was the fact that it was difficult to forcefield off due to the nat/main having the same height | ||
|
DYEAlabaster
Canada1009 Posts
On May 05 2012 14:56 Plexa wrote: That isn't why Bel'shir 1 was a 4gate heaven.. it was the fact that it was difficult to forcefield off due to the nat/main having the same height Yeah- I mention that as well. However, with the proximity of the high-ground pod, it made things even worse if a stalker did manage to sneak up there. It's like pouring salt on a wound. | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
| ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 05 2012 15:28 DYEAlabaster wrote: Yeah- I mention that as well. However, with the proximity of the high-ground pod, it made things even worse if a stalker did manage to sneak up there. It's like pouring salt on a wound. If a stalker got up there you deserved to lose.... the issue was you could just warp over anyway? With no need to sneak a stalker across. In fact, the high ground helped to give the defender some advantage | ||
|
titanicnewbie
63 Posts
On May 05 2012 16:16 Plexa wrote: If a stalker got up there you deserved to lose.... the issue was you could just warp over anyway? With no need to sneak a stalker across. In fact, the high ground helped to give the defender some advantage I think that's the case with this map as well. The highground pod in the image he gave us leads directly to where the command center is going to be. If you've got a stalker that close then the enemy being able to warp in across those LOS blockers is the least of your problems. Also, the whole point of the highground pod in question is to allow scouting to the far side. A supply depot/pylon/overlord on or above the pod would give you advance notice of the Protoss setting up his proxy pylon anyway. | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gdog6.jpg) Top down Overview: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/p62Bo.jpg) Analyzer Summary: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rml3J.jpg) Changes: Rocks at the natural have been removed to open it up more. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2JAmU.jpg) High ground passages have been removed in the middle. Also, a new ramp has been added, it is blocked by rocks though. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oYtlz.jpg) Backdoor has been changed. Still rich mineral fields (56 resources) but they are moved farther back and put on a ramp. You now have a safe natural to take yet you will have to keep an eye out on the mineral wall. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Xy7jg.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HnWC3.jpg) Any Problems/Bugs/Glitches you find with the map, please feel free to let me know. Search Prophets Passage on US to play! Thanks, | ||
|
titanicnewbie
63 Posts
My only concern right now is the 6th base (yeah a little late-game I know). The natural is now safely tucked in the back, and the third is right out front. But the 4th and 5th are both in a line from the natural, which leaves the 6th awkwardly stuck on the far side of the map. Not sure if I have a solution for you right now, but I'm imagining that that 6th would be mighty underutilized... | ||
|
See.Blue
United States2673 Posts
| ||
|
Yonnua
United Kingdom2331 Posts
In practice there are still problems. If the defending player only has the main and the back door expansion, it's faster for the attacking player to get from ramp to ramp. The defending player has to go nearly twice the distance with their units to be able to hold off the attacker. Much like the back door on blistering sands. It's getting better but it still needs some work. | ||
| ||
