EPTWork In Progress Melee Maps - Page 160
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
| ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
| ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
Version 1.5 + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5zbasPo.jpg) Version 3 + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BKOlXvP.jpg) Version 4 + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5b94Iwy.jpg) Poll: Which Version should I use? 1.5 (same as before) (6) 3.0 (with new high ground area) (1) 4.0 (without Blue Storm ramps) (0) 7 total votes Your vote: Which Version should I use? (Vote): 1.5 (same as before) | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NuZSfxl.png) + Show Spoiler [Analyser] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Q4bv9EA.png) I wanted to make the backdoor expansion less viable to be taken early by having a larger ramp there for only a single base, and it's also more vulnerable to harass. Is this enough or should I also block it off with rocks or something of that sort? | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
On my WIP Thinking about removing the top left/bottom right corner bases, and just making that area a pathway around the vertical 4th. Thoughts? | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
@andG: you're a funny one. go play some 2v2, ha. this map looks fine though. note that it will be quite a macro map actually, since you can put 5 bases behind an easy walloff (until rocks are down). but the rocks timing would have to be dedicated double 1base aggression which is scoutable and holdable. so the tendency will be to air harass if anything while taking 5 bases and then an easy 2 more bases when the armies are larger. however, the backdoor rocks will provide plenty of options for intermediary aggression. for this kind of map, I like it a lot better than the ladder offerings in the genre, like katherine square which has backyard nats and quite far-by-ground 3rds. I would say create more air space at the north and south edge to allow harassment of main and nat that way. and the backdoor base can probably have much more cliff space, remove some or all of that hole in the lowground. and imo it's better to have the minerals 1 square away from cliffs and put doodads in there, looks much better from certain angles where it's hard to see workers and click minerals. I would also put a small ramp down from the highground golds facing into the narrow lowground. | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CcFgygh.jpg) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8LchtoT.jpg) Wasn't going to upload it until it was finished, but I'd rather have feedback, think the CR ramps should be x1 or x2 size? Added an extra route to the 6th base for evacuating workers. Thoughts on the theme/textures? | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
The new layout is awesome! | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
 | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
On February 27 2015 13:38 SwedenTheKid wrote: Like Antares I don't like very narrow ramps anywhere other than the main. Here it seems fine though; it is based on Blue Storm after all.Wasn't going to upload it until it was finished, but I'd rather have feedback, think the CR ramps should be x1 or x2 size? Added an extra route to the 6th base for evacuating workers. Thoughts on the theme/textures? I'm not sure in what situation the centre bases will ever be taken, so the 12/6 o'clock bases look like 5ths to me rather than 6ths. On a related note, it feels like there belongs a base in the top right/bottom left corner, but I don't know.On February 27 2015 05:53 EatThePath wrote: One of the more common complaints about the current 2v2 maps seems to be that the mains and naturals are too vulnerable to air harass and doom drops, so I wanted to avoid that. That being said, all my maps have at least 5 grid squares of air space along the edges, so there is some potential for harass there.I would say create more air space at the north and south edge to allow harassment of main and nat that way. imo it's better to have the minerals 1 square away from cliffs and put doodads in there, looks much better from certain angles where it's hard to see workers and click minerals. Don't worry, it'll look better in the final version which will also have more organic cliffs that don't protrude as much.I would also put a small ramp down from the highground golds facing into the narrow lowground. That makes sense.the backdoor base can probably have much more cliff space, remove some or all of that hole in the lowground. I made some changes to the backdoor natural area (droppable high ground) and made the mains larger:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/moM0HdD.jpg) (The high grounds in the middle are unpathable.) | ||
|
Aircooled
United States79 Posts
On February 27 2015 13:38 SwedenTheKid wrote: + Show Spoiler + Wasn't going to upload it until it was finished, but I'd rather have feedback, think the CR ramps should be x1 or x2 size? Added an extra route to the 6th base for evacuating workers. Thoughts on the theme/textures? I normally don't post here unless it's a map of mine, but I REALLY like what you did with the 5th/6th compared to previous versions. Also 2x for sure, I mean there is a rock tower there too. | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
On my map- Thinking about making the middle bases non-standard, to make them more advantageous, but don't know what to do exactly. Don't want to make them gold, because I feel like that would favor Terran to much, and I also want them to last longer. What are thoughts on making them x6 normal mineral, x2 gold mineral, x1 standard gas, x1 rich gas? Non-standard much?  | ||
|
Coppermantis
United States845 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9K630S2.png) Really chokey around the main/nat/third/fourth. Bases close together; probably needs better fourth option. Blink into main very strong. Anything else? | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
| ||
|
Aircooled
United States79 Posts
@Coppermantis: I think you have enough room in the mid where you have plenty of space to shrink that down and work on the 1st-4th base setup; making that less chokey and the middle, bottom right/top left, all more interesting. You could maybe even shrink the map a bit i can't tell how big it is though. | ||
|
LComteVarauG
Australia158 Posts
On February 27 2015 13:38 SwedenTheKid wrote: + Show Spoiler + Wasn't going to upload it until it was finished, but I'd rather have feedback, think the CR ramps should be x1 or x2 size? Added an extra route to the 6th base for evacuating workers. Thoughts on the theme/textures? I think that the aesthetics are really cool! The way you have combined those two tilesets really fits your map's layout in my opinion.  | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
| ||
|
LComteVarauG
Australia158 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PsvdRlt.jpg) Bases and Analyser: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/V0dxvmW.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uYgbVin.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HUwngnZ.png) I think this is my first real 4 player map! | ||
|
SwedenTheKid
567 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I really like half bases  | ||
|
LComteVarauG
Australia158 Posts
On February 27 2015 19:11 SwedenTheKid wrote: Zerg could have trouble getting a 3rd in vertical spawns vs Terran, since they can't expand towards their opponent, while it benefits the enemy to do so. Map is pretty big, even for a 4p map, so that might help with ZvT or ZvP. One thing I would dislike might be that all the bases are on the outside edges of the map. Maybe put a half base (6 mineral, one rich gas) outside of the natural ramp, with it's mineral line hugging the unpathable hole area there (shrink it down to fit the base). It would also add more bases, 16 is a bit below average for a 4p map, I think. Just a suggestion. + Show Spoiler + I really like half bases About the Zerg vs Terran, I have made the map cross spawns so that should be fine But thank you about the half base, I might do that when I get a chance  | ||
| ||
