|
Steppes of War 2.0 by -NegativeZero-
Not yet published
Playable bounds: 140x140
Textures: all Bel'Shir
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yhL2Q.jpg)
Angled overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
Aesthetic/detail images:
+ Show Spoiler +
Based on Steppes of War by Blizzard
Notes/features:
-Map size increased to 140x140 from the original 124x124
-Overall layout is similar to the original. The area around the 4th/5th was changed the most extensively; also 6th bases (6m1hyg) were added, and terrain features added to the enlarged center
-Natural choke can be walled with 3 3x3 buildings
-Daybreak/Cloud Kingdom style rocks on 3 FF ramp in front of the nat (could remove these if attacking is too difficult)
-Tanks can siege a single geyser at the natural, nothing else
-Center design modeled after the popular BW concept of a shorter, more direct path which is narrow and awkward to traverse with a large army, encouraging players to take a longer route later in the game. All units are capable of passing through the center choke, which is 3 squares (1 FF) wide at each end and 2 squares wide on either side of the Xel'Naga tower.
Concerns:
-Potentially too easy to defend 3 bases (possible solution: remove rocks in front of nat)
-Some areas in the center might be slightly too open
-Tanks being able to hit 1 of the nat's geysers (intended as a feature of the map, but could be a problem)
-I need a better name for this - something that will make people who search for Steppes of War in SC2 want to try this map over the original
Original (old) post:
+ Show Spoiler +Steppes of War 2.0Not yet publishedPlayable bounds: 132x140 Textures: Bel'Shir only ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7EDd7.jpg) Inspired by Clbull's recent attempts to redesign Steppes of War, I thought I'd try to make my own version. Unlike him, who took significant liberties with the map design, the goal for me was to keep the layout as close to the original as possible while making it more balanced and playable. The map is in no way complete - especially the aesthetics, so please don't complain about those quite yet  . I thought I'd see if anyone had suggestions or criticisms before finalizing everything. Important notes: -The map size was increased slightly from the original, but basically by the minimum amount I thought necessary. -The nat is unsiegeable except for the one geyser nearest to the cliff - tanks can't hit the minerals at all. Some questions/concerns: -Might be too easy to turtle on 3 bases. The obvious solution is to remove the rocks at the ramp by the nat, but the rocks are important to help defend early aggression due to the short rush distances. -Watchtower placement. One tower in the center is pretty standard, but due to the small map size it might cover too much. It is possible to avoid the tower's range by hugging the cliff between the nat and the opponent's 5th. Things I'm definitely changing: -Adjusting 5th bases so the long corridor entrance can't be sieged from enemy nat (either moving the bases or just slightly stretching the map horizontally)
|
rush distances look too close imho,middle isnt chokey, probably needs 2 more bases somewhere, basically its near impossible to remake steppes of war to be playable and balanced atm
|
On August 21 2012 13:57 X3GoldDot wrote:
rush distances look too close imho,middle isnt chokey, probably needs 2 more bases somewhere, basically its near impossible to remake steppes of war to be playable and balanced atm
What? This is fine. It's like a 2 player entombed valley.
|
United States10479 Posts
made a shit map into a really good map. amazing rework!
|
This is some really beast work right here. When are you going to publish so I can try this out.
|
Yeah that rush distance looks ok to the naked eye at least. It looks similar to Ohana's, maybe a hair shorter. I'm not really sure why the middle being too "chokey" is listed on your concerns. That's a pretty open center.
Concerning the XNT, I actually think this map is one of the few that could get away with not having one. The 2 main reasons you place a xel'naga are 1) to provide a point of contention 2) give players a way to watch their front or backdoor (especially if there are a lot of attack paths). Oh and maybe 3) because the map is friggin' huge. Although that's sort of covered in 2. Here, players will be fighting in the middle already because it's basically the only way to get anywhere, so 1 is scratched off the list. As far as 2 goes, the distance between your nat ramp and the 3rd is small, and there's no other way to get in other than drops.. so there's not really an alternate attack path to watch. And obviously reason 3 is of no concern here.
One thing I thought when I saw this was "wow this map is so laughably bad for aggressive blink stalker play" but I don't think that's an actual issue. Just funny (maybe only to me though.. mapmaker humor :-\) so I thought I'd share.
Anyway, map is obviously improved. Good job. I'd hit it.
|
On August 21 2012 15:46 Fatam wrote:
Yeah that rush distance looks ok to the naked eye at least. It looks similar to Ohana's, maybe a hair shorter. I'm not really sure why the middle being too "chokey" is listed on your concerns. That's a pretty open center.
Concerning the XNT, I actually think this map is one of the few that could get away with not having one. The 2 main reasons you place a xel'naga are 1) to provide a point of contention 2) give players a way to watch their front or backdoor (especially if there are a lot of attack paths). Oh and maybe 3) because the map is friggin' huge. Although that's sort of covered in 2. Here, players will be fighting in the middle already because it's basically the only way to get anywhere, so 1 is scratched off the list. As far as 2 goes, the distance between your nat ramp and the 3rd is small, and there's no other way to get in other than drops.. so there's not really an alternate attack path to watch. And obviously reason 3 is of no concern here.
One thing I thought when I saw this was "wow this map is so laughably bad for aggressive blink stalker play" but I don't think that's an actual issue. Just funny (maybe only to me though.. mapmaker humor :-\) so I thought I'd share.
Anyway, map is obviously improved. Good job. I'd hit it.
Thanks. Basically I've made both BW and SC2 maps and I always forget just how little space armies in SC2 take up lol. I'll consider taking out the watchtower, but I'll probably wait for a couple more people's opinions before I make changes like that.
|
Makes sense. I don't know if you should or shouldn't take it out, I just think the map could "get away with it" so to speak.
A map like Daybreak probably couldn't.
|
Shrubbery!
Between the north and south middle mounds perhaps?
|
yeah the map could definitely use foliage or something
|
Very good rework!
I feel that the fourth base is a little too isolated, and perhaps a bit too easy to defend due to there being only one entrance with ramp. Perhaps the ramp should be split in two, each facing each player's starting base to make the base feel more like 'part of the map'. Otherwise, you could make this base an island by moving it further away and add a fourth somewhere else.
I also think that the middle misses something, it needs to be a bit bigger (for rush distance, but also to be more interesting). I was thinking there could probably be a ramp structure involved there, possibly along a single XWT.
|
My personal preference tends to be bases that are further away and easier to defend, more similar to BW maps. Ideally, the increased ease in defending compensates for the increased distance, since you can stall more easily while your army moves to defend, and the longer distance between bases gives the defender more time to prepare if they do lose a base, rather than the attacker just steamrolling through multiple bases in rapid succession. Also, the original map had a single ramp at the 4th, even if it was blocked by rocks...
The aesthetics aren't finished, I'm definitely going to add a lot more foliage when I'm done with the terrain.
Also, does anyone know how to copy doodads and terrain at the same time? I'm going to widen the middle horizontally by 8 squares, increasing the dimensions to 140x140, and I'd rather not manually adjust half the map's doodads back into place after moving the terrain over.
|
my concerns would be that the natural isnt very friendly in design for protoss forge fast expand. the rush distances are short, but imo thats not a problem really as there should be some small rush distance maps. but when protoss doesnt have an easy way to wall off against early pools it kinda sucks for them.
and yes please add 2 more bases
|
On August 23 2012 08:14 -NegativeZero- wrote:
My personal preference tends to be bases that are further away and easier to defend, more similar to BW maps. Ideally, the increased ease in defending compensates for the increased distance, since you can stall more easily while your army moves to defend, and the longer distance between bases gives the defender more time to prepare if they do lose a base, rather than the attacker just steamrolling through multiple bases in rapid succession. Also, the original map had a single ramp at the 4th, even if it was blocked by rocks...
The aesthetics aren't finished, I'm definitely going to add a lot more foliage when I'm done with the terrain.
Also, does anyone know how to copy doodads and terrain at the same time? I'm going to widen the middle horizontally by 8 squares, increasing the dimensions to 140x140, and I'd rather not manually adjust half the map's doodads back into place after moving the terrain over.
Your best option is to copy the doodads to another map, scoot your terrain, than copy them back. I like to pick a few key doodads to mark their position on the grid in relation to my cliffs n ramps, so I know that I've placed them symmetrically.
|
On August 23 2012 08:20 EcstatiC wrote:
my concerns would be that the natural isnt very friendly in design for protoss forge fast expand. the rush distances are short, but imo thats not a problem really as there should be some small rush distance maps. but when protoss doesnt have an easy way to wall off against early pools it kinda sucks for them.
and yes please add 2 more bases
It looks like the choke is 3 buildings, maybe with a one square gap. The same as tal darim altar. Against an early pool you just cannon your main minerals. If you're talking about speedling aggression, you need a wall but that looks fine here, although this map looks a little like other where the ramp is in front of the natural, making a breakthrough-->runby easier and more dangerous.
|
On August 23 2012 08:20 EcstatiC wrote:
my concerns would be that the natural isnt very friendly in design for protoss forge fast expand. the rush distances are short, but imo thats not a problem really as there should be some small rush distance maps. but when protoss doesnt have an easy way to wall off against early pools it kinda sucks for them.
and yes please add 2 more bases
It's possible to wall with 3 3x3 buildings at the nat like any normal map. Both a complete wall or a wall with a 1-square gap should be possible.
I think I'll try to add a couple 6m1hyg bases in the center after I enlarge the map, not sure where I'll put them yet though.
Edit: picture was wrong, doodads in the cliff are screwing up building placement, I need to make a couple adjustments.
|
Finally got around to finishing this map after a couple months of occasionally working on it, OP has been completely updated. All posts before here refer to the "original (old) post" spoilered at the bottom of the OP.
|
It looks like you can have 3 bases too easily, I think you should widen the 3rd ramp to be at least 3 width or even 4, cause right now it is very very easy to secure 3 bases.
|
|
|
I like the idea of making old unbalanced maps balanced. How is the siege tank range for the natural?
|
Looks sweet! you should post it on reddit, they'd lap it up.
|
Call it neo Steepes of War, thats what they did for the Brood war maps.
Looks like a really good map imo, maybe make the center full bases, or dare i say it...even golds!
|
What I'm going to do with my Metalopolis remake is name it Metalopolis: Presidium so that people who search for the old map see the new one. You should do something like that, since after all the whole point is to recognize the old map. 
i.e. Steppes of War: Distant Thunder
(see, the map name is "distant thunder" (whatever) but it calls up an image of distance -- which is a major point of differentiation for the new version)
|
Looks very good! Good job
|
Awesome! Send it to Blizz :D
|
Metalopolis remake sounds cool. Always liked that map other than the nat being retarded.
|
You've done something great here.
|
Nice! I like it ;D
On August 21 2012 13:19 -NegativeZero- wrote:
-Potentially too easy to defend 3 bases (possible solution: remove rocks in front of nat)
I dont understand this concern, I dont see how it is easier to defend than on Daybreak or any other map. Quite the contrary when I think about TvZ and Muta Harass(maybe im too focused on that mu atm to see what you mean). The issue with Muta harass nowadays(as many Zerg players told me) is that the Mineral Fields on the current Maps are too close to each other to make it worth the Mutas, on your Map this is not an issue anymore, i like that. Even though I am terran ;D
|
On October 13 2012 03:52 OxyGenesis wrote:
Looks sweet! you should post it on reddit, they'd lap it up.
Indeed, 57 replies and 229 upvotes. :D
On October 14 2012 12:37 Daumen wrote:Nice! I like it ;D Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 13:19 -NegativeZero- wrote:
-Potentially too easy to defend 3 bases (possible solution: remove rocks in front of nat)
I dont understand this concern, I dont see how it is easier to defend than on Daybreak or any other map. Quite the contrary when I think about TvZ and Muta Harass(maybe im too focused on that mu atm to see what you mean). The issue with Muta harass nowadays(as many Zerg players told me) is that the Mineral Fields on the current Maps are too close to each other to make it worth the Mutas, on your Map this is not an issue anymore, i like that. Even though I am terran ;D
The 3rd choke is significantly narrower than on Daybreak, plus it's a ramp to high ground. Right now, the ramp to the 3rd is 2 FF wide and the ramp in front of the natural is 3 FF wide, which is the same as on Entombed Valley - except right now I have the rocks narrowing the 3 FF ramp. The 2 ramps are further apart than on Entombed, but it still might be too easy to defend against ground units - in which case I'll remove the rocks.
I'm glad you like the air harassment vulnerabilities - that's something which I liked about the original map layout and wanted to keep in my version since it's exciting to see and has been pretty rare in recent games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/frnXD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/A1mqE.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ayfg2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OITzd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i41cF.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nwJ0t.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SxHbo.jpg)
