Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 156
Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin | ||
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
| ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
I love how the thirds are set up in relation to the center of the map with the destructible rocks. | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
![]() I pushed the golds closer to the center and added more ramps to that location. I also changed the set up of the rocks in the center. I started decorating, but am not where near finished. What do you guys think of the layout so far? | ||
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
![]() imo | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
![]() I don't really want to connect the low grounds, but maybe I can make the third area and the center more open near the ramps so that you can switch sides there? | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
![]() I increased the size of the third and pushed one of the ramps out further. I also shrunk the high ground spot by the center and made the rock longer to compensate for it. So when the rocks go down, there will be more maneuvering room. | ||
Icetoad
Canada262 Posts
![]() I elevated the third with 3 entrance to 2nd lvl and made the previous ramp with rocks, a choke blocked by 6x6 rock. The natural was put also on 2nd lvl because of many possible imbalance. | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
On February 08 2015 09:38 Icetoad wrote: Made some change to the map. + Show Spoiler + I elevated the third with 3 entrance to 2nd lvl and made the previous ramp with rocks, a choke blocked by 6x6 rock. The natural was put also on 2nd lvl because of many possible imbalance. I like these changes, nice work! | ||
Aircooled
United States79 Posts
Also is this worth finishing? It's pretty silly and pretty big at 160x160. Inspired by this + Show Spoiler +which was posted here a while ago. ![]() | ||
waltheri
Czech Republic3 Posts
![]() Does it have a chance? Should I add some high/low ground in the middle? The playable size of the map is 124x132. | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
| ||
NinjaDuckBob
175 Posts
On February 09 2015 10:28 Aircooled wrote:Also is this worth finishing? It's pretty silly and pretty big at 160x160. 3rd base looks pretty hard. For Protoss in particular, at least Zerg has openness and Terran might be able to lift to the near Gold base. Would make a closer 3rd option personally. | ||
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
@aircooled: Hmm I think it's worth playing around trying to try and make it work. 4p version of the "distant 3rd gold behind rocks" that we saw a couple 2p versions of recently. Being 4p kind of gives you license to go overheavy on the macro map standard features and include the gold as the gimmick, the extra, and it'll be hard to balance without the standard features. I would add 3rd bases maybe like so: ![]() I dunno what to put mid, more pathways or maybe a base or two? I think you could probably get the map size smaller too this way. Maybe play with the main/nat to make sure the nat2nat in adjacent isn't too close. Maybe use diagonal towards-the-center pathways or rocks to help this. | ||
Coppermantis
United States845 Posts
![]() Minor changes. Templar said that the nat seemed awkward, but I couldn't think of anything specific to change so I've left it mostly the same. Moved the unbuildable rocks to the side of the main ramp closer to the natural so that a protoss wall can both cover the ramp and be more in range of photon overcharge--the way the terrain was designed, a wall would have to have been positioned by the 3x wide ramp and could be attacked from outside PO range. Key doodads behind the mineral line make it impossible to put a cannon there that is completely sealed off by pylons. | ||
And G
Germany491 Posts
On February 12 2015 13:31 Coppermantis wrote: Templar said that the nat seemed awkward, but I couldn't think of anything specific to change so I've left it mostly the same. It isn't always necessary to have space behind the natural mineral line if the main cliff is right behind it, and it seems to me that this map would benefit from moving the natural mineral line closer to the main. I would also move the natural choke a little closer towards the centre of the map, especially horizontally, and expand the natural towards the central expansion (it's not a problem if you can blink across there). I think this would alleviate a lot of the awkwardness. | ||
Coppermantis
United States845 Posts
| ||
JaredStarr
Canada115 Posts
On February 12 2015 14:27 And G wrote: It isn't always necessary to have space behind the natural mineral line if the main cliff is right behind it. I thought it was standard to be able to fit a 3x3 building somewhere behind you main & nat mineral line, also for drop plays? Coppermantis: I actually really like the Main/Natural setup. It does look a little awkward, but imagining actually playing in that space looks cool. I'm kinda' flipped around, where-as i feel the rest of the map is pretty awkward and doesn't do the main/nat setup justice. | ||
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
![]() I wanted to do a different main-nat-third set up than what my other maps have been. I feel like I use Overgrowth's main-nat-third layout too often and wanted something different. I focused on how I wanted the third and alt third to be set up, and then created the rest of the layout around that. Thoughts? | ||
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
I would move the ramp on the CW 3rd closer. This would probably make it the favored choice, not sure if that's what you want. But I like the shape of the 3 base vs 3 base positioning in that case. ![]() | ||
| ||