|
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin |
On October 02 2012 14:47 Fatam wrote:The aesthetics on these are inconsistent / not finished, but layout-wise.. vote for which version you think I should go with. Thanks for your help. I hope to eventually get this map right. Option 1 (6th is far away, with 2FF ramp towards opponent) + Show Spoiler +Option 2 (6th is far away, no ramp) + Show Spoiler +Option 3 (6th is far away, with 1FF ramp towards you) + Show Spoiler +Option 4 (6th is close to your 5th) + Show Spoiler +Option 5 (old 6-base layout) + Show Spoiler +Poll: Which design is better?6th is far away, with 2FF ramp towards opponent (9) 69% 6th is far away, with 1FF ramp towards you (3) 23% 6th is far away, no ramp (1) 8% 6th is close to your 5th (0) 0% old 6-base layout (0) 0% 13 total votes Your vote: Which design is better? (Vote): 6th is far away, with 2FF ramp towards opponent
(Vote): 6th is far away, no ramp
(Vote): 6th is far away, with 1FF ramp towards you
(Vote): 6th is close to your 5th
(Vote): old 6-base layout
Hey Fatam, this map is looking really cool! It's taken a lot of revisions but it's starting to look solid and unique at the same time. Option 1 is definitely my fave out of those. I agree with samro in that some of the proportions feel a bit weird and it would be great if terrans could take the other base as a forward third (currently there isn't much incentive to do that). What I like to do sometimes if I have been tweaking a layout a lot is to redraw the layout on a piece of paper but make it as simple as possible (whilst preserving the basic layout). I find it helps a lot with working out proportions (although I'm a graphic designer so maybe that's just the way I work). It can also be difficult to see on a 60º overview, it'd be cool if you could post a top-down overview in this thread or on skype.
Aesthetics-wise I also think it could use a little work, the style is fine but I would like to see more variation in the different levels. The manmade areas look a bit out of place too. Keep up the good work and hit me up on skype!
|
Thanks. I agree that the man-made parts are not the best, They felt right when I first made the map but now just look odd. I've been thinking about changing them to some other aesthetic, just haven't gotten around to it yet. I've been concentrating on the layout of this map + my other maps that are coming (one in particular that I think can be really good) + RL stuff
here's the overview you wanted
+ Show Spoiler +
I'm not really sure which proportions are weird, but I'd be glad to take a look if you or whoever mentioned it before could point them out
|
Looking for some feedback, can this layout work? cross spawn only. Aesthetics will be something similar to Redstone Fortress
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0DWNp.jpg)
|
your Country52798 Posts
That's a 4 player map right?
Thirds seem too big and rush distance a bit small.
Also you can use cliff merging for the tiny passage under the natural between the natural and third.
One more thing. The thirds seem awkward to take if your opponent is counter-clockwise from you.
|
Yea it would have to be cross spawn only, so I guess that kinda defeats the purpose of it being 4 spawn, I left the highground there between the nat and 3rd on purpose cause i want to try some aesthetic ideas out there.
I actually planned on trying to do lava flows throughout the map, which will cause most of the lowground to be more chokey in the final version, probably should have mentioned that  I'm not sure if it will work out or not, has anyone done a lava beach before?
|
On October 03 2012 07:46 lefix wrote:latest version: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3eQZe.jpg) still trying to think of a proper map name
This map is insane!!!! It's so beautiful. I wanna play on it >_<
|
your Country52798 Posts
On October 07 2012 11:16 TheFish7 wrote:Yea it would have to be cross spawn only, so I guess that kinda defeats the purpose of it being 4 spawn, I left the highground there between the nat and 3rd on purpose cause i want to try some aesthetic ideas out there. I actually planned on trying to do lava flows throughout the map, which will cause most of the lowground to be more chokey in the final version, probably should have mentioned that I'm not sure if it will work out or not, has anyone done a lava beach before?
... um, not counting myself? (my bad aesthetics)
I don't think so..
Making the lowground between the natural and third chokey seems ok, but it would be better if you just made the third a bit smaller.
|
Hello everyone! :D
this is my first post, ever, on TL! aw yeah!
anyway, this is a map my friend and I made!
so yeah, the idea is to try and favor positioning play, and actually using the terrain, instead of getting a free ticket to 3-base turtle land :D
First of all, the rush distance is relatively short, the natural ramps points directly towards each other, AND the xel'naga towers do NOT reveal the rush path. (so you don't get complete map control from having 1-2 units on the map!)
And! the expansion pattern is a bit tricky too. The idea is that you can either expand vertically or horizontally. If you take your 3rd, expanding WAY from your opponent, your opponent can get a grat positioning from the high ground area, right above/below your 3rd. (and even grab the gold expo, while he's there!)
If you expand TOWARDS your opponent, the ramps from the high ground area is a little bit awkward, and you can take the xel'naga, and actually have easy map control. But the expo is a little bit awkward from your natural and main.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6f6ff.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Rndoe.jpg)
SO!
I'm interested in your opinion on the positioning theorycrafting, the kind of awkward 3rd's, the huuuuge air space or whatever you can come up with (:
Also, I think we might call it "Holy Grounds" or something along those lines.
cheers!
TL;DR I made a map.
|
I've been scratching a lot of maps recently and finally settled on this. I'm not quite sure what to do with the middle and I think it might be too chokey. I might make the lakes a bit smaller to open it up a bit in that area.
Bounds: 112x144
Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Trying to "balance" the map out,
next change I am looking for is the middle and nat chokes, not sure what to do with them.
also looking for a aethiestics to make my map look pretty.
Overview:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YgZD3.jpg)
Map Bounds: 134x128
|
KaptajnGrue the centre is interesting, but unsure if you should realy have high yield there. the two bases at the sides are really difficult to take. maybe have one base facing the middle but make it closer to the third?
Aircooled: a seperation of the centre would help to make the bases to each side easier to defend. once you move down your ramp you prety mich have to go the whole way though in a push. also you have to have your tower, depending on which side you want to go. if one player expands ccw the other cannot go far ccw though. if you want more than a fourth base taken you need another design. maybe the 9/3 just needs another position.
i like how you connect areas, but overall it seems a it small.
Rukis: main is quite small, third is a bit too far and the area between nat choke and third is very close and exposed towards the centre with tower. rush dtsinace seems very close, how far is it in comparison to, let's say cloud kingdom? the fourth to sixth base are also quite far away - except the highround which is untakeable in most games - they seem to be as far away as the opponent's nat choke, which is quite distant and hard to take/defend.
|
WIP
Rum Valley
Published NA
10/9/12
Overview:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XbTQ4.jpg)
- Increased size of map
Medium
Player Bounds : 145x 131
Full : 152x 144
- Increased Size of main
- Remodeled ramps in the middle and at third.
- Re-positioned Nat choke
- Increased Third Size
- Xel'naga only covers middle now.
- Looking for an aesthetics and texture remodel.
|
|
|
TheFish: I think you can work it so that rotational spawns aren't all that imbalanced. If you move the ccw third a little closer, i.e. closer to the rocks, and make the ramp with rocks on it a little wider, then both thirds are viable, one being slightly closer but requiring you to destroy rocks, and the other being slightly farther away. I think this is interesting but different.
Fatam: I would rotate the middle highground ramps to be going the opposite way (NW and SE) to let the open area outside of the middle bases get a little more love, as the area below the ramps is very cramped as is.
Aircooled: It seems really easy for a terran to siege a zerg's natural, as the gap is very small and the ground travel distance is very long.
Rukis: You've made the third even farther away by making the main larger. I think this is a problem. Also the highground base in the middle could be taken as a third which would be in a dominant map position, and sort of mess up which bases belong to which player. This makes it hard to come back from a losing position because your bases are so vulnerable. The distance between the natural and this supposed 6th is just too short.
I did some proportion and aesthetic work on my map Ring Mount. Thoughts?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DkPYvl.jpg)
|
That third is pretty cool.
Aesthetics are clearly from a deranged mind, but are also cool.
4th might be a little awkward for the defender, since the attacker has an easier path into it than the defender. Maybe not a huge deal though.
|
On October 10 2012 17:54 Fatam wrote:
That third is pretty cool.
Aesthetics are clearly from a deranged mind, but are also cool.
4th might be a little awkward for the defender, since the attacker has an easier path into it than the defender. Maybe not a huge deal though.
^
All the bases are fine I think, but zerg won't like this map. Too hard to find a good engagement. Instead of punishingly large open areas I would just stretch out some chokes and hallways.
On October 08 2012 08:06 Aircooled wrote:I've been scratching a lot of maps recently and finally settled on this. I'm not quite sure what to do with the middle and I think it might be too chokey. I might make the lakes a bit smaller to open it up a bit in that area. Bounds: 112x144 Overview: + Show Spoiler +
This is really cool. I think the chokiness in the middle is fine, it let's you defend from the center which is somewhat unusual, but it's not even that narrow and there are plenty of options to maneuver elsewhere. Problem I see is that the 4th base (going cw) is basically free if you've established the 3rd, and same but moreso for the 5th. Basically I think you'd have to redesign the whole map to adjust a lot of stuff to make this work. But the concept is unique and should be pursued. Oh make sure you can't tank the natural from the other side of the chasm behind the minerals.
On October 07 2012 23:39 KaptajnGrue wrote:Hello everyone! :D this is my first post, ever, on TL! aw yeah! anyway, this is a map my friend and I made! so yeah, the idea is to try and favor positioning play, and actually using the terrain, instead of getting a free ticket to 3-base turtle land :D First of all, the rush distance is relatively short, the natural ramps points directly towards each other, AND the xel'naga towers do NOT reveal the rush path. (so you don't get complete map control from having 1-2 units on the map!) And! the expansion pattern is a bit tricky too. The idea is that you can either expand vertically or horizontally. If you take your 3rd, expanding WAY from your opponent, your opponent can get a grat positioning from the high ground area, right above/below your 3rd. (and even grab the gold expo, while he's there!) If you expand TOWARDS your opponent, the ramps from the high ground area is a little bit awkward, and you can take the xel'naga, and actually have easy map control. But the expo is a little bit awkward from your natural and main. SO! I'm interested in your opinion on the positioning theorycrafting, the kind of awkward 3rd's, the huuuuge air space or whatever you can come up with (: Also, I think we might call it "Holy Grounds" or something along those lines. cheers! TL;DR I made a map.
Welcome! Can you post a top down picture of the whole map? It's hard to judge proportions from the ones you have.
It looks like all the areas near bases are too choked up and the ramps have awkward narrow adjoining high ground areas. The 3rd base looks a bit far away on either side. (I know this is by design but you could still reduce it.)
On October 07 2012 11:16 TheFish7 wrote:Yea it would have to be cross spawn only, so I guess that kinda defeats the purpose of it being 4 spawn, I left the highground there between the nat and 3rd on purpose cause i want to try some aesthetic ideas out there. I actually planned on trying to do lava flows throughout the map, which will cause most of the lowground to be more chokey in the final version, probably should have mentioned that I'm not sure if it will work out or not, has anyone done a lava beach before?
If you end up keeping it cross-only, you should make a 180 symmetric formation in the middle so it has two different map setups, one for each spawn setup. I think it "works" but you could easily adjust things here and there to allow 4 spawns.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LVnH6.jpg)
note sure if i am going to stick with the lava theme
|
On October 11 2012 03:19 lefix wrote:
note sure if i am going to stick with the lava theme
If you do, work some on the textures, they're the same all over D:
|
On October 11 2012 03:19 lefix wrote:+ Show Spoiler +note sure if i am going to stick with the lava theme
zerg will cry, so easy 3 and 4 bases for protoss and terran. easy for zerg too of course but they won't be able to stay ahead.
|
On October 11 2012 04:17 EatThePath wrote:zerg will cry, so easy 3 and 4 bases for protoss and terran. easy for zerg too of course but they won't be able to stay ahead.
Agreed. The base against the main with only 1 entrance should definitely at least be a 6m1hyg base, and the other choice of 3rd could be slightly further away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NHWx9.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/h6MeN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EbZb7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eCEGK.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/adDwx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tj2ox.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s2HWQ.jpg)
