|
Beelzebub
Created by Rife and Meltage
Published on [NA] in the arcade
Playable Size: 124 x 124
Before
+ Show Spoiler +
Analyzer
+ Show Spoiler +
Screenshots
+ Show Spoiler +Main ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JmZmA.jpg) Natural ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lZp77.jpg) Third ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vdlia.jpg) Fourth ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UPcZe.jpg) Fifth ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UUIbg.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6ntjV.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/klkra.jpg)
Changes
+ Show Spoiler +
Besides the obvious stuff like moving rocks and the aesthetics there were many small changes to improve the playability of the map. The general layout has not changed but every single base has been moved around and tweaked to make the proportions correct. For example the natural was too open before and it was too easy to break sown the rocks between the third and bypass any static defenses that were place at the front of the natural. The third probably received the most adjustments. Ramps were widened and moved, some were reduced, and the front door into the natural was widened as well. Plus countless other tweaks that are now to subtle to remember.
Feedback welcome
Replays
+ Show Spoiler +
My map portfolio: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=352620
|
I'm a little worried about the choke into the natural. Can siege units (colossus/siege tank) cover that whole choke? You might want to trim off that corner piece of the main to prevent turtling being a little too powerful.
|
On May 24 2012 07:43 IronManSC wrote:
I'm a little worried about the choke into the natural. Can siege units (colossus/siege tank) cover that whole choke? You might want to trim off that corner piece of the main to prevent turtling being a little too powerful.
I made the adjustment. It does feel better now upon play testing. Thanks
|
Ah, a volcanic tileset! There aren't enough of these, in my opinion, and you did a good job with the aesthetics here. In particular, I like the way you set up rocks at the third. They prevent immediate access to the base, but don't prevent the base from getting started before the rocks are destroyed. One of the few ways I've seen rocks add to a map instead of detracting from it. Well done. I'm wondering, though: are the small plateaus between the main and 5th pathable? Would you be able to drop a Siege Tank there, for instance?
On a side note, I was always saying "Beezlebub" instead of "Beelzebub". I feel stupid now. :|
|
On May 24 2012 11:37 Archas wrote:
Ah, a volcanic tileset! There aren't enough of these, in my opinion, and you did a good job with the aesthetics here. In particular, I like the way you set up rocks at the third. They prevent immediate access to the base, but don't prevent the base from getting started before the rocks are destroyed. One of the few ways I've seen rocks add to a map instead of detracting from it. Well done. I'm wondering, though: are the small plateaus between the main and 5th pathable? Would you be able to drop a Siege Tank there, for instance?
On a side note, I was always saying "Beezlebub" instead of "Beelzebub". I feel stupid now. :|
Those small plateaus are pathable. My thinking was that by the time you get a 5th base you should have options to deal with siege tank harassment from there.
BTW I had to look up the spelling.
|
Texture Updates - Steam vents in main bases (See screenshot)
|
I felt like the middle of the map was not interesting enough. Therefore I completely reworked it. The new middle seems to work well.
|
|
|
United States10247 Posts
Oh my god that rush distance. Basically two chokes for 5 bases... ewwww.
I think a neat idea would be to move the 4th more closer to the 5th, and the 5th move to the base of the main near the reaper jump area. This would make it more interesting for grabbing a 5th base, as both players would really be contesting for it.
|
I'm a fan of the layout, but I think you need to redo the proportioning.
Also, maybe add a high-ground ridge between the third and fourth as I think it'd be very bad for Terran in TvZ especially.
|
In my opinion its not a bad start, but needs more work.. try highlight your edges a little tiny bit, to make it a little less confusing.
But about the map it self, the only thing i can see, is so wide paths, i can only imagine a 2 base 3rd attack all in.
|
You have come a long way with this map, I really see how you have learned more and more...
A tad more variance of textures would have been nice but thats a question of taste I guess.
|
I think this map is a bit too safe. There just not much early pressure potential here, and it can be too safe taking 5 bases.
|
I think it's a bit problematic how easy it is to take a fourth and fifth, especially considering there is no sixth base. With only 5 bases per player, they should be taken a bit slower than other maps to avoid too many mined-out situations. And generally speaking, even if there were 6 bases, I think the fourth and fifth are too easy anyway.
The fifth is actually pretty close to the opponent, but it also feels like the third-fourth-fifth are too close together. Maybe you could push the fifth minerals towards the opponent's main without changing where the entrance is. Now that I look at it, though, maybe you could move the ramp that direction, too, without actually shortening the path to the opponent's nat, but increasing the distance you have to travel to defend from a drop or something like that.
I think it's good to promote harassing a fair bit, and positional play, rather than direct pushing or deathballing. So, if you want to make some bases more vulnerable, it might be good to make them more vulnerable to harass in particular. You could add cliffs or little paths going behind the minerals, or stuff like that, to make it a bit easier to harass those bases.
|
I like the map! Although I'm not going to go into the layout, I would say that you need more doodads, as they give your map it's theme. A map that's on the tileset "Meinhoff", you can make that into a theme of the moon. For this map, you should make it a theme of whatever relates to the name. Good map, although I agree with 'ragz_gt'.
|
Why exactly did u call it 'beelzebub'? I don't see any references or anything anywhere. Not that there is anything wrong with just liking the name / manga / series / mythology / flies, im just sayin...
|
On July 02 2012 01:41 []Phase[] wrote:
Why exactly did u call it 'beelzebub'? I don't see any references or anything anywhere. Not that there is anything wrong with just liking the name / manga / series / mythology / flies, im just sayin...
Beelzebub is a name for the devil, which sorta links to the whole lava/volcanic nature of the map I guess.
|
On July 02 2012 03:26 IronManSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 01:41 []Phase[] wrote:
Why exactly did u call it 'beelzebub'? I don't see any references or anything anywhere. Not that there is anything wrong with just liking the name / manga / series / mythology / flies, im just sayin... Beelzebub is a name for the devil, which sorta links to the whole lava/volcanic nature of the map I guess.
Ya that was my first guess, but beelzebub isn't the devil, its the lord of flies (as far as I know, correct me if im wrong here. Wasent 'baal' the demon lord or something?). I mean, if he wanted a name that had something to do with lava / volcanic, me thinks there are a lot better names that give that feel. Anyways I dont wanna bitch about the name too much, its just a name, and I like 'beelzebub', no matter the map. I just wondered why you would pick it for this map, or maybe the author had some deeper meaning.
|
I have been working with meltage on this map for the pro-am. Here is an update on its current state. We aren't done yet though. I would like to hear some feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow nice job you guys, this looks amazing. Aesthetics are so important in helping to read a map!
This map is centered around the long obstructions that break up the movement around the tower. Now that the rocks are gone, this is where all the "action" will be in terms of active play -- more or less army positioning and map presence.
I would like it better if there was less connected-ness around the 4th base. It doesn't really add positional value to the map, it's just your basic extra base, as needed, forcing map control or strong local presence. There's no good way to take a "forward" position to defend your 4th base without just having map control anyway, the tower being to close. Since you can't really do anything about this, it'd be much more interesting if the two ramps into the 4th weren't so similar. Some negative space here, like a high ground pod (even with a ramp up to it) would greatly extend the positional dynamics of the map, which are the weak point imo. In general quite solid, if a little bland/shallow.
|
So why put rock at the 3th?
|
On July 25 2012 14:14 Zerg.Zilla wrote:
So why put rock at the 3th?
Because if Protoss FFEs with 2 entrances to the nat in ZvP they'll just die.
|
On July 25 2012 10:37 EatThePath wrote:
[i]I would like it better if there was less connected-ness around the 4th base. It doesn't really add positional value to the map, it's just your basic extra base, as needed, forcing map control or strong local presence. There's no good way to take a "forward" position to defend your 4th base without just having map control anyway, the tower being to close. Since you can't really do anything about this, it'd be much more interesting if the two ramps into the 4th weren't so similar. Some negative space here, like a high ground pod (even with a ramp up to it) would greatly extend the positional dynamics of the map, which are the weak point imo. In general quite solid, if a little bland/shallow.
Somethign like this?
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/826/tkgw7.png/
|
I think sec base to third base is too close..i just think.
|
So I'm guessing the pool thing in the adjacent front of the two mains are just to prevent sieging from the low ground? Besides that, I just find the 4th slightly hard to take, both options (northern and southern 4ths) seem quite far away... Also, the fact that there is only 1 Xel'Naga tower changes the metagame visibly, which is in my opinon a great move by you. Besides that, the 3rd-Nat-Main conjunction looks pretty much like Ohana LE's, and everything else seems great. Overall good and playable map.
|
United States10247 Posts
i feel like the 5th base still needs to be moved close to the opponent main. map looks way too splitable with no bases to contest right now. but i love the changes so far. keep it up!
|
your Country52797 Posts
I hated it before but now it seems fine, the map itself actually makes sense.
|
We have been wokring on the aesthetics. How do you like it?
A suggestion is limiting the red stone rocks texture to organic ramps only, and tone down the use of cracks on the low ground some.
|
I really like the aesthetic changes. Map looks really solid. The only thing I'd like to see is something more around the edge of the map, even if it's just some lavafalls, or maybe expand the crystals you have down there. Great work regardless.
|
|
|
I like the textures and aesthetics that Meltage and you have done. This is, yet again, another great improvement to be documented in the ProAm contest! I'm not a big fan of the map because its linear/standard and very small, but I think its a great learning map.
|
look good now i will test it
|
I uploaded a couple of half decent replays.
On August 04 2012 02:15 monitor wrote:
I'm not a big fan of the map because its linear/standard and very small, but I think its a great learning map.
I respectfully disagree. 
|
Hmm, rocks blocking the path to the 3rd -AND- 4th? Zergs are going to QQ for dayyys.
As far as I know you want to only block one of those paths with rocks (if you're going to use rocks at all) so that zergs in tournaments don't insta-veto the map. Atm I think the situation here is kind of like Entombed Valley for a zerg, but worse.
Otherwise I like the map
|
On August 04 2012 11:38 Fatam wrote:
Hmm, rocks blocking the path to the 3rd -AND- 4th?
Wut? Perhpas you misread beacuse of the textures. Theres rocks between nat and third, then into the attack path of the 5th. They're there for good reasons.
|
oh I guess that is the 5th that is blocked off, not the 4th. Not so bad then.
|
There have been some aesthetic upgrades done by Meltage and los blockers have been added. This is not intended to have any bearing on the MOTM Pro-am.
|
los added is ok, but I would personally change the way LOS had been placed (to much symmetrical/circular me).
Otherwise gorgeous update/map!
|
Yes, I would change the LOS to keep the same shape overall, but make it more natural looking by varyign some in width (say 3 doodads fat in the middle, then 2 doodads fat on the sides and in the outer edges 1 doodad fat).
Also, I wouldn't cover the entire lane in the low gorund example, but leave 3-4 untis wide gaps at the edges
|
For the low-ground LoS blockers, I would suggest changing them out with Char curtains. Hot smoke with glowing lava underneath seems more aesthetic fitting.
+ Show Spoiler [quick demostration] +
|
On August 09 2012 23:03 Meltage wrote:
Yes, I would change the LOS to keep the same shape overall, but make it more natural looking by varyign some in width (say 3 doodads fat in the middle, then 2 doodads fat on the sides and in the outer edges 1 doodad fat).
Also, I wouldn't cover the entire lane in the low gorund example, but leave 3-4 untis wide gaps at the edges
Done. I was already thinking about doing this after seeing it in the overview.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9gEId.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dEG7l.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GePSn.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/23Q7I.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/N93Tv.jpg)
