| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On February 25 2015 01:30 TheSkunk wrote: Work in progress visual style for a new map, Treasure Island + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NsfLJjv.jpg) That's pretty awesome. Maybe there should be a brick texture "under" (at the edges of) the protoss ship areas. The boundary looks harsh at the 3rd base in this picture. | ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
| ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
Version 1.5 + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aWhDm11.jpg) Bounds 128x128 (going for a small map, I guess) 12 bases No watchtowers ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EK1x2uV.jpg) Shrunk down the bounds, as well as the mains, paths etc. May need to push the naturals further back towards the mains though, to reduce nat to nat distance. Center is reworked. Edit- I don't know if I'm digging this version. Tell me if you like it, otherwise I'm just going to work with altering version 1.5. | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
You just have to make sure defense and offense are balanced on the map. On one hand, you can take an easy third by destroying the rocks and protecting three bases from one choke. On the other hand, timing attacks are going to be powerful since the rush distances are even shorter since the map was shrunk. I think it's a great interpretation of Blue Storm for SCII. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
| ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
On February 25 2015 10:51 EatThePath wrote: @sweden: I would put a very narrow choke on the highground path between the outside edge highground bases. This lets you evacuate workers if needed but puts the reliance on lowground control or preemptive positioning for defense. It'd be cool if you could put a narrow choke in the middle, too, for more interesting early game positioning, but the map is already quite splitty and this would just make it worse. It'd be nice if there were some other pathway besides the ramps in center but idk where it would go. Split maps are not necessarily bad maps. If games are too splitty, then you end up with boring matches with less action. The layout is fundamentally split in the sense that the middle will be more narrow than anywhere else because of the ramp set up, and it is impossible to open up a path anywhere else to fix that (I can only think of a backdoor to the natural, and that would seriously break the map imo). I want to address a few things you say here. Low ground control should not be something forced on this map. I would compare its middle to Echo's middle, in the sense that you want to control around the middle and not in the middle. Secondly, I think that a more narrow middle will make early timing attacks really difficult to defend. Sentries will be much more powerful, and late game the middle will be even less spacious, which is not something you want to risk with a map that may already have split map problems. I am assuming that the opportunity for aggression on this map, specifically the rush distance, the proxy locations, the ramp right into the middle from the natural, and the super aggressive potential third will counteract a potential split map scenario in the late game. I made similar assumptions when planning Dark Matter, since it was small, could be split in half, and had a very fixed expansion pattern (unlike this WIP, though). This is honestly a lot of speculation though. | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JOdYVIS.jpg) Anyways, this one is quite splitty as well, possibly more because it is much larger (the size of version 1.0), as well as having a smaller middle choke. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On February 25 2015 11:04 Antares777 wrote: Split maps are not necessarily bad maps. If games are too splitty, then you end up with boring matches with less action. The layout is fundamentally split in the sense that the middle will be more narrow than anywhere else because of the ramp set up, and it is impossible to open up a path anywhere else to fix that (I can only think of a backdoor to the natural, and that would seriously break the map imo). I want to address a few things you say here. Low ground control should not be something forced on this map. I would compare its middle to Echo's middle, in the sense that you want to control around the middle and not in the middle. Secondly, I think that a more narrow middle will make early timing attacks really difficult to defend. Sentries will be much more powerful, and late game the middle will be even less spacious, which is not something you want to risk with a map that may already have split map problems. I am assuming that the opportunity for aggression on this map, specifically the rush distance, the proxy locations, the ramp right into the middle from the natural, and the super aggressive potential third will counteract a potential split map scenario in the late game. I made similar assumptions when planning Dark Matter, since it was small, could be split in half, and had a very fixed expansion pattern (unlike this WIP, though). This is honestly a lot of speculation though. I think you misunderstood me, I meant lowground relative to the last 2 outer edge bases (UL / BR), so speaking absolutely I meant the midground, the same cliff level as the nat. I am thinking about how the 1/7 base is on bluestorm and trying to make it more like that. As for middle choke, I like it extremely as a design concept but I don't think it works here. Just kind of thinking out loud. My musing for an additional pathway is something like a narrow lowground corridor from mid that finds its way somewhere to the north or south extremities and up and out, but it definitely wouldn't fit in the new reduced size version. Split maps are okay if everything on the way there is interesting. This map would be alright in that department, but it's not as expansive as say, bluestorm, (in the middle) where nearly half the map diagonal is a ramp you'd have to hold along its entirety to cover all your bases by ground. Here, you can hold 2 spots and 3 chokepoints for every base on your side by ground. That said, the air based options will be really highlighted lategame, although that will be informed more by a ground stalemate and basetrade offers rather than positioning plays. In other words, I believe you could play this very turtlely and securely if you wanted to and it'd be hard to stop you from doing it. I'm thinking mech or SH. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
| ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
The alt. version you created seems like it would be better than the first one in LotV, but worse in HotS. I guess I'm just thinking ahead haha. @EatThePath Gotcha on the low ground part, my bad. What do you guys think about more aggressive/open expansions to combat split map issues? | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
Probably MVP design option here is bases with their mins at a cliff edge so that holding the base requires map control and/or holding the CC site itself as well as an entirely different route/location for the cliff edge. Close awkward cousin being double-sided bases. | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
As for my map, I personally want to go with the space platform version, due to the center being better imo (due to split-map "problems") and the size being more reasonable for the amount of bases. So my question now would be what to do about the cliff-vunreble 5th/6th bases. As you said, EatThePath, they require map control and can easily favor Terran (and my map already has perks for Terran players I think). Think it works here, since its easy to block off the route to the bases back side. But your the expert. Also might alter the middle by making the 3 different paths more distinct, by adding small cliff walls on the middle high ground, between the ultra-ramps (and removing the isolated pods in the open). Also, for my original version... BW Overwatch much? | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
| ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
| ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EbUFZS8.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Analyzer] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fzoiojk.png) This is a 2v2 map with all spawns enabled and also a 4v4 map. The question is, does it make any sense at all? | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
Not many real chokes, if you take down the rocks. Maybe make the areas with DR smaller chokes using 2 6x6 rocks instead of diagonal rocks.That way the map still has good choke points in the late game. Don't really like the close proximity of the golds. Seems like they are kinda winner-bases, especially for Terrans. Maybe move them a tad outward? Idk. Like everything else, craziness aside. Also, need more rocks  | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3sW4LmB.jpg) + Show Spoiler [Analyzer] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pDjphWB.png) Fewer rocks though. | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
| ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
http://imgur.com/FOqnz2A］ ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mrYq1TX.png) [/url]Also, I sketched this alteration, but I feel like it just helps the defender and the map really doesn't need that. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xhEYSGY.png) | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
I like it, I think it helps counter the split map problem. It also adds a very high point of interest. By splitting the map more bottom left vs top right, it becomes less top left vs bottom right split. If the high ground becomes too important, maybe try making it midlevel and add high ground between the two main ramps (does that make sense?) so that the defender cannot block the entire side of the map unless he splits his army in half to cover both ramps. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
OSC
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Cup
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
OSC
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
Replay Cast
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
