|
On May 24 2012 12:15 a176 wrote:
where is it? "cracked cell" returns nothing in search and there is no link to a thread in your post ...
Holy nested quotes!
Anyway, here - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333359
You didn't find it because it doesn't have a dedicated thread, it's presented along 2 others. At this point, if you want some more focused feedback on the map Rkynick, I think that would be a really good idea.
|
On May 24 2012 12:19 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2012 12:15 a176 wrote:
where is it? "cracked cell" returns nothing in search and there is no link to a thread in your post ... Holy nested quotes! Anyway, here - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=333359You didn't find it because it doesn't have a dedicated thread, it's presented along 2 others. At this point, if you want some more focused feedback on the map Rkynick, I think that would be a really good idea.
thanks. will take a look now.
|
On May 24 2012 02:05 Aunvilgod wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2012 01:10 Nightmarjoo wrote:
It's annoying how many maps submitted are good enough to consider but aren't on the NA server for testing. Couldn´t you just look at some replay? Are all judges only on the NA server?
Looking at a replay wouldn't give me the feel of the map, which is primarily what you gain from actually testing a map. The picture tells plenty about the concept and layout, but that's meaningless if the map is too small or too large. Actually playing the map and comparing the experience on the map to that on tourney or ladder maps helps sorting out maps that are ostensibly of a similar level of execution. And who if not myself would play on these maps anyway to give a replay? The other judges are all mappers, not players.
I can get a pretty good idea of how good a map is from the picture alone, but actually playing the map can give surprises. For example I initially thought Alamar Depths was a pretty solid (if standard) map, but after playing it I found its distances were too long, its balance of tight and open wasn't right, and that the nat was too indefensible (favouring the backdoor expo, which is annoying because it's 1gas).
Another example: my impression of Nature's Hold was that it was a standard but well-executed map with good proportions and pathing. Playing the map confirmed these things, but also revealed that the map's size was smaller than comfortable, making defending and attacking annoying.
At a glance it's easy to separate awful and decent maps, but when there's a larger number of decent maps (such as this month's competition) play-testing is important in deciding which are the best and which are just pretty pictures.
|
That's why we have everyone send in their map files 
Check your skype.
|
Everyone but me ? 
|
seems like there were more people who forgot to send in their map file :D
|
do you think i can still submit by mail if i post in this thread at the right time ?
|
don't ask. just send it in asap. and don't let it become the norm
|
Ok, map sent 
Thx !
|
I might have an idea, might be terrible though. I might try cutting the low ground paths through the center, which would increase the control value of the center high ground significantly, since the only 2 paths besides are perilously narrow. Of course, I might also open things up just a little bit to compensate for the reduction of pathing, and I might also consider the movement of expansions just as you are doing, not sure what I'd do with them exactly, but I think if I had this map in the editor I could have some fun with it. Maybe you should make a thread for it, so more people can check it out!
|
if anyone cares...
The finalist poll for the motm unofficial poll has started. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=339251
+ Show Spoiler [finalist poll] +
poll ended, see the thread in SC2 general, or the post below
I should have had the first round end sooner actually, I doubt many people will vote in the second poll, we shall see.
edit: @NewSunshine: That might be an idea, though without more extensive modifications I think it might be too narrow without those extra paths. As it is it seems as if an army on the middle pod might be at a slight disadvantage, because of the long distances to everything. Another small change is that I might add a tower in the middle (to watch over the side paths) but this might make the center too strong, and the expansions again too vulnerable. I'll eventually make a map thread, probably soon.
|
|
|
I really wanted to like Opernicus; it looks so cool in the picture. It's kind of awful in-game though
Nature's Hold looked good in the picture too, but just turned out too small in-game.
Prophet's Passage is a neat map, but I hate the 2nd expo in the corner. I think it's both unnecessary and too close to the other one there.
Silver Sands is pretty good in-game, but the main not defending the nat choke at all is a little annoying.
These four maps were among my personal top10 favourites for this month.
|
@Nightmarjoo - Nice inputs. What race are you playing?
|
On May 29 2012 13:26 Namrufus wrote:5.Nature's Hold by erazertied with Ragoo's 'TPW Doomsday' and Arctic Raven's 'Dark Shines', this map had more votes in the group polls+ Show Spoiler +Interesting results.
Tied at 5 votes, that's one big sample size.
Also Nature's Hold and especially Agria Rock top5 shows me how serious I can take this :D
|
On May 29 2012 18:19 Ragoo wrote:Tied at 5 votes, that's one big sample size. Also Nature's Hold and especially Agria Rock top5 shows me how serious I can take this :D
NO YOURS DOES :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
|
On May 29 2012 18:19 Ragoo wrote:Tied at 5 votes, that's one big sample size. Also Nature's Hold and especially Agria Rock top5 shows me how serious I can take this :D
Hey, you coulda asked everyone to vote for Doomsday instead. :/
And anyway, it was for fun, not to be taken seriously.
|
Well, don't get this the wrong way, but I'm kind of surprised that Agria Rock got so high up honestly. Maybe it's just me but to me the texturing and aesthetics of that map do not quite seem up to the level of the other maps that got in the top as well as some maps that didn't.
|
On May 29 2012 14:04 Nightmarjoo wrote:I really wanted to like Opernicus; it looks so cool in the picture. It's kind of awful in-game though
Why it's awful in game ? Can you give any constructive feedback ? I will try to improve it... thanks !!
|
On May 30 2012 01:49 th0t wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 14:04 Nightmarjoo wrote:I really wanted to like Opernicus; it looks so cool in the picture. It's kind of awful in-game though Why it's awful in game ? Can you give any constructive feedback ? I will try to improve it... thanks !!
Well I think most of the map's problems come from using a layout better suited for a larger map size. I think the main mineral formation should be rotated so it's easier to get out of the main (because the formation is horizontal right now and so close to the ramp it needlessly congests movement out of the main). The expos don't have enough space I think, so they tighten the paths that run through them too much further congesting movement. While I understand that the point of the layout is to favour the middle for pathing whilst putting the expo/fighting focus on the sides, I think the sides need to be viable to move a large army through too. The area between the nat and the backdoor is a little too spacious I think. It's good that it's not tight, but it's not an efficient use of the space imo. I think the distance from the nat choke to the main choke is a little long; I dunno if that's bad, but it feels weird. I don't like the expo against the main because of how pathing ducks into its area instead of flowing through it like the other expos.
Now even if you agree these are problems and choose to fix them (by enlarging the map I think is the only real solution), I'm concerned that the map doesn't have enough elements to give it strategic variety. I feel like any game on the map is likely to feel the same as any other. The degree of expo order and owner ambiguity definitely helps, but since every expo is basically the same there's no real strategic or positional advantage to taking any particular expo. I like the map's layout a lot; its execution and the concept implemented are just somehow lacking. My favourite part of the map is the dynamic formed between the pathing through the side expos and the layout of the middle. You might be best off making a new map with those elements instead of trying to improve this one. A lot of the sizes and shapes of this map are awkward and would require a lot of space management to improve; probably not worth the effort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rTbwx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2LEGG.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bUsRM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PL1C6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WCtYv.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u0kss.jpg)
