|
Sup doods,
i had some itches to make a new map i guess. Tried to make a Starcraft 2 viable Destination. I thought its pretty cool now. The 2 extra gases was an idea i used before on Lost City, it kinda evolved from a half base in the same location to what it is now, based on feedback.
I cant add analyzer Pictures this time because it doesnt work with patch 1.5.
The Original Destination:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=293234
General:
+ Show Spoiler +Texture: Tarsonis/Custom
Playable: 136x170
Expands: 10 + 2 extra gas
Xel'Naga: 2
Uploaded: EU
Nat/Nat: 136
Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
Pictures:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Umm, is the natural siegable from where the third is, because that seems pretty bad...?
|
On August 05 2012 05:22 Yonnua wrote:
Umm, is the natural siegable from where the third is, because that seems pretty bad...?
Ohana LE.
That said, these complaints have become less and less prevalent for a reason. We've begun to realize that siege tanks aren't harassment units. They cost too much, are too immobile, and require too much support to effectively use for harassment. Does it happen sometimes? Yeah, sure. But a siege tank out in the middle of nowhere is one less siege tank defending the counter-attack.
Because of the siege tank's splash effect, the more tanks you have, the better it is to have them (with some diminishing return beyond X tanks focused in Y area against Z-type units.) 1-3 tanks (a harassment force) is the difference between winning and losing if the enemy attacks your army or your base. And siege tanks attacking some of the second mineral line will not net you a win, perhaps not even a great advantage. It's just not worth the effort.
|
On August 05 2012 05:38 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 05:22 Yonnua wrote:
Umm, is the natural siegable from where the third is, because that seems pretty bad...? Ohana LE. That said, these complaints have become less and less prevalent for a reason. We've begun to realize that siege tanks aren't harassment units. They cost too much, are too immobile, and require too much support to effectively use for harassment. Does it happen sometimes? Yeah, sure. But a siege tank out in the middle of nowhere is one less siege tank defending the counter-attack. Because of the siege tank's splash effect, the more tanks you have, the better it is to have them (with some diminishing return beyond X tanks focused in Y area against Z-type units.) 1-3 tanks (a harassment force) is the difference between winning and losing if the enemy attacks your army or your base. And siege tanks attacking some of the second mineral line will not net you a win, perhaps not even a great advantage. It's just not worth the effort.
thx for the explanation
|
So it's not related to "The Grid" at all? I was expecting an update of that.
Tileset's got a nice old school feeling.
We generally just stick the old rule of thumb which was never letting siege tanks reach anything from anywhere, ever. I'm pretty interested in the idea of reverting some of that.
|
I like it a lot. The base layout makes it seem really similar to ohana, but the way the center is laid out at the cliffs between the natural and potential third make this look like it will be way more interesting to play. positional control seems really important here; even more so than on probably any other widely used map. The little ledges and walls could make for interesting play. Good job!
One thing I would say though, is that because the third is on the highground above the natural and the natural lacks a ramp, really agressive pushes that take advantage of multi-pronged attacks will be really powerful. It's not really good or bad, just something to consider.
|
Yeah Ohana LE has that, but on Ohana the natural has high ground vision advantage, doesn't that factor into the easiness of setting up a siege tank attack on the mineral line ? Not that I disagree with the fact it's marginal most of the time.
Sick aesthetics, the mix between dirt, roads and bridges feel BW-esque. And I wish we could see some macro games on it just to see how players adapt to the extra gas.
|
It looks really cool, I love the idea of updating old BW maps for SC2. I like the xnt positions, and the recessed third is really cool. Might be stealing some of your ideas soon! (;
|
On August 05 2012 07:17 a3den wrote:
Yeah Ohana LE has that, but on Ohana the natural has high ground vision advantage, doesn't that factor into the easiness of setting up a siege tank attack on the mineral line ? Not that I disagree with the fact it's marginal most of the time.
Sick aesthetics, the mix between dirt, roads and bridges feel BW-esque. And I wish we could see some macro games on it just to see how players adapt to the extra gas.
Not necessarily, at least in this circumstance. On this map the minerals are quite far from the third ramp, you need a scan or flier to get sight of it anyways. The greatest advantage afforded to the harassing player is that the defending player would also need to get high ground vision to remove the threat.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mNIrD.png)
|
On August 05 2012 09:02 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 07:17 a3den wrote:
Yeah Ohana LE has that, but on Ohana the natural has high ground vision advantage, doesn't that factor into the easiness of setting up a siege tank attack on the mineral line ? Not that I disagree with the fact it's marginal most of the time.
Sick aesthetics, the mix between dirt, roads and bridges feel BW-esque. And I wish we could see some macro games on it just to see how players adapt to the extra gas. Not necessarily, at least in this circumstance. On this map the minerals are quite far from the third ramp, you need a scan or flier to get sight of it anyways. The greatest advantage afforded to the harassing player is that the defending player would also need to get high ground vision to remove the threat.
Initially, I had my doubts about this feature, but the way it is now is actually really cool. It has this back-n-forth swing of who has the advantage, sort of like Marines vs. Banelings - with no upgrades, banelings win. With stim, marines win. With baneling speed on creep, the banelings once again have the advantage. That's sort of what you've got here. I approve.
|
On August 05 2012 05:38 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 05:22 Yonnua wrote:
Umm, is the natural siegable from where the third is, because that seems pretty bad...? Ohana LE. That said, these complaints have become less and less prevalent for a reason. We've begun to realize that siege tanks aren't harassment units. They cost too much, are too immobile, and require too much support to effectively use for harassment. Does it happen sometimes? Yeah, sure. But a siege tank out in the middle of nowhere is one less siege tank defending the counter-attack. Because of the siege tank's splash effect, the more tanks you have, the better it is to have them (with some diminishing return beyond X tanks focused in Y area against Z-type units.) 1-3 tanks (a harassment force) is the difference between winning and losing if the enemy attacks your army or your base. And siege tanks attacking some of the second mineral line will not net you a win, perhaps not even a great advantage. It's just not worth the effort. Well, Ohana is in my opinion not the best map, apart from that, a major difference is that here you have to walk a mile and a half around to deal with the tank whereas on Ohana it's pretty close, not to mention the low ground vs high ground.
That said, I think people can cry a bit too much about siegable spots, especially on maps made by Blizzard people love to point out something like 'omg, the gas on the third can be sieged from a place you can easily reach, so broken, ZvT will be impossible on this map.' and then it turns out that the fact that you can easily reach it really helps. I think it's fine, you have to walk a long way around to place a tank there.
|
I think its just too small - too thin for anything to really developed into a standard game. I like the take on it though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/P8VyM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ghqHo.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AZpYVl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4Bg4rl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7fvyLl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uTDF2l.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fhOggl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/S3dAZl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HWjxAl.jpg)
