• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 10:43
CEST 16:43
KST 23:43
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Finals Preview: Sweet Victory!9[ASL22] Ro4 Preview: Mirror Mirror6[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: Within Reach5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: In A Tizzy11[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver5
Community News
Evil Geniuses - shutting down7ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier3Weekly Cups (October 12-18): 5.0.17 era begins1[$1250] International ShieldBattery League52Weekly Cups (October 5-11): Farewell to 5.0.164
StarCraft 2
General
Evil Geniuses - shutting down How do you feel about the mass reverts in the 5.0.17 PTR? No more SC2 streamers on team liquid? Weekly Cups (October 12-18): 5.0.17 era begins Server Blocker
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL goes to London! 2026 Offline Finals Nov 21-22 ScienceCraft (October 24-25) - Live Event ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier WORTEX Challenger Series — Open SC2 LAN in Budapes
Strategy
[H] ZvP Mid-Late Game: Stalkers Collossi HT
Custom Maps
[G] How to playtest arcade maps [A] Nemrods 1/4 players [M] (2) Sweltering Sands [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 548 Shining Bright The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 547 Temple Of Terror Mutation # 546 Catch the Train
Brood War
General
Do we even care about balance? SCHNAIL now supports Remastered BW General Discussion Rollback Netcode in Brood War SOOP Announces New Women's Monthly Tournament
Tourneys
[$1250] International ShieldBattery League [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL23] RO24 Group Stage [ASL22] Grand Finals
Strategy
Cliff Jump Revisited (1 in a 1000 strategy) Simple Questions, Simple Answers Replay Review Process - What do you do?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread General RTS Discussion Thread Nintendo Switch Thread Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Dawn of War IV
Dota 2
Dota 2 Champions League Season 3 Begins April 25!
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Chess Thread
Fan Clubs
Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
How Much Genes Contribute to…
TrAiDoS
ShieldBattery on Mac
Kraekkling
[ASL22] Ro4 Day1 Ticket Giv…
bITt.mAN
38 yo Retired SWE loo…
PurE)Rabbit-SF
Can Bots Beat Pros?? Starcr…
namkraft
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 7079 users

Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 171

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Prev 1 169 170 171 172 173 217 Next
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin
-NegativeZero-
Profile Joined August 2011
United States2142 Posts
April 15 2015 11:18 GMT
#3401
@NinjaDuckBob: A little better than the previous version, the idea of the easily wallable double entrance nat is interesting.
-The mains are small and weird, expand them to fill the corners
-The sequences of bases going down the sides are all too close to each other. I'd say remove one pair and spread the rest out, 12 bases is plenty.
-Proportions are awkward, try to remove unnecessary tight corridors like the ones with the watchtowers, the gaps between the forward bases and the center hill, and the crevices in front of the 4/10 bases. This is the big one, there are a lot of other proportion problems that I can't really explain, just try comparing this to some of the well-known community maps such as the ones that made it on ladder.
vibeo gane,
Zweck
Profile Joined February 2015
Germany211 Posts
April 15 2015 11:33 GMT
#3402
@NinjaDuckBob:

Isnt the Main kinda too small for terran?
https://www.instagram.com/instazweck/ ____ behance.net/brachert _____ https://zweckthings.tumblr.com/
NinjaDuckBob
Profile Joined March 2014
191 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-04-15 19:21:25
April 15 2015 18:26 GMT
#3403
-- Made the mains bigger.
-- Redesigned the sides of the map.
-- Got rid of the 4/10 small paths.
-- Am weary of making the gap between the center bases and hill airspace, tried it and I'm not sure if I want to restrict that path. Any suggestions or reasoning for that being a nonvalid concern?

[image loading]
NinjaDuckBob ~ Fear the fuzzy!
Zweck
Profile Joined February 2015
Germany211 Posts
April 16 2015 01:42 GMT
#3404
Wich one should i dismiss for TLMC6 ? :D

1+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


2+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


3+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


4+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


Poll: which one should i dismiss for tlmc6

(Vote): 1
(Vote): 2
(Vote): 3
(Vote): 4



Help me decide plllls :D
https://www.instagram.com/instazweck/ ____ behance.net/brachert _____ https://zweckthings.tumblr.com/
SwedenTheKid
Profile Joined July 2014
567 Posts
April 16 2015 02:34 GMT
#3405
[image loading]

was going for a remake of Lilac Unicorns, I feel like the layout it to standard to not already exist...
Casual Mapmaker
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
April 16 2015 04:37 GMT
#3406
On April 16 2015 10:42 Zweck wrote:
Wich one should i dismiss for TLMC6 ? :D

1+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


2+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


3+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


4+ Show Spoiler +

[image loading]


Poll: which one should i dismiss for tlmc6

(Vote): 1
(Vote): 2
(Vote): 3
(Vote): 4



Help me decide plllls :D


#1 is the weakest I think
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
The_Templar
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
your Country52798 Posts
April 16 2015 04:42 GMT
#3407
#s 1 and 4 feel really similar so I'd get rid of one of them. #1 honestly feels like it would be better with a few tweaks (removing a base would be a good start...), but right now #4 is probably superior.
ModeratorI am still alive, somehow
TL+ Member
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
April 16 2015 08:54 GMT
#3408
Have a couple specific questions about a very large 2p template I'm working on.
(The few doodads are just a couple looks I'm messing with, but the ones near the main do tell you that the area around those geysers will be unpathable to reduce surface area to the main. May have to toy with the terrain a little there to make sure blink isn't too easy, but anyhow.)

[image loading]

My main concern is.. does zerg have a non terrible 3rd? I feel like it's fine for them assuming the rocks are down, and I think getting them down shouldn't be too bad considering they can walk their first queen down, inject the nat when it's up and then just work on the rocks the whole time (maybe throw the first couple lings at it as well, if needed). But wanted to hear it from a zerg.

Question 2 is @ the lowground expos at 4 and 10 oclock, are they pointless / redundant? I think the highground above them from your opponent's side kind of stretches the area you would have to defend, as opposed to just defending the nearby 4th. So even though they are close in proximity the range you would have to go to defend both is big. But maybe that base is too hard to defend in the first place and should just be deleted. Idk :-P
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
LComteVarauG
Profile Joined January 2015
Australia158 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-04-17 23:27:04
April 17 2015 23:21 GMT
#3409
+ Show Spoiler +
On April 16 2015 17:54 Fatam wrote:
Have a couple specific questions about a very large 2p template I'm working on.
(The few doodads are just a couple looks I'm messing with, but the ones near the main do tell you that the area around those geysers will be unpathable to reduce surface area to the main. May have to toy with the terrain a little there to make sure blink isn't too easy, but anyhow.)

[image loading]

My main concern is.. does zerg have a non terrible 3rd? I feel like it's fine for them assuming the rocks are down, and I think getting them down shouldn't be too bad considering they can walk their first queen down, inject the nat when it's up and then just work on the rocks the whole time (maybe throw the first couple lings at it as well, if needed). But wanted to hear it from a zerg.

Question 2 is @ the lowground expos at 4 and 10 oclock, are they pointless / redundant? I think the highground above them from your opponent's side kind of stretches the area you would have to defend, as opposed to just defending the nearby 4th. So even though they are close in proximity the range you would have to go to defend both is big. But maybe that base is too hard to defend in the first place and should just be deleted. Idk :-P

I'm a Zerg player! :D

In my opinion, the third base is quite difficult to secure for a few reasons. Firstly, even if the queen at the natural works on the rocks non-stop (even with lings), you can't really defend the third whilst it is being constructed and the lings aren't being used for scouting, securing watchtowers, getting in the main to see what your opponent is doing, etc - which is what we build our 4 - 6 early zerglings for. Also, with the rocks where they are, the fairly standard (but already risky) 3 hatch before pool build order is virtually impossible because you cannot defend the third adequately when it is so far away before the rocks are destroyed (especially with the high ground cliff that allows early reapers to attack virtually non-stop).

It could work the way it is, but it would change Zerg play a lot I think, like when the third base on a map is really open, Protoss will almost always do some sort of 2 base timing. If Zerg can't get one more base than it's opponent, we have to do some serious damage to them (and then behind that we can break the rocks, so that would work).

I would suggest blocking (either with rocks or by removing the ramps) all of the other entrances to the third and then removing the rocks from the natural to the third (maybe widen that ramp that goes from the natural to the third too). That way, you get a feasible third that the other races can take easily too because it is an "in-natural" third, and it makes the high ground cliff make more sense. However, later in the game, it can be opened up to the way it is now allowing for massive attacks on both the natural and third. That would create some interesting play around those bases, though then you might need to open the high ground up a bit - think of a Protoss deathball there

About the low ground expansions, I do not think that they are pointless, but they seem very chokey, and I do not really think I can see and Zerg player securing them properly until the base above them is protected. But that's just really my opinion

Btw: I am only Platinum league but I consistently beat diamond/masters players when I do go and "ladder" (i prefer mapping now)

Hope I helped! And well done with such a unique design!

Edit: I really think that the bases above and below the mains (like plausible fourths) are really cool because if you do not spread yourself very thin, that base is available for your opponent (and vice versa).
Author of "[LCV]" maps on SEA and NA. Don't Panic. Member of the clan: JRB (Just Really Bad)
Rukis
Profile Joined April 2009
United States252 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-04-18 00:05:00
April 17 2015 23:54 GMT
#3410
Looking for help!

Not Named.
[image loading]

Middle:
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


Main To Main:
Cross: 50s in game
Adjacent: 45s in game

I think the Layout is solid. However the third looks a little too far. Before anyone ask the purpose of the half minerals/gasses in the middle were to give it some spice. (I liked how the ramps were and proportions but a full base didnt work out.) So it wouldn't be boring or uninteresting. As it is a 4 player map I felt that there also enough bases to begin with and so adding 4 half bases might be good idea.

As for a question I need help making the doodads, the decals and space decals, appear in-game currently not working :/
Flash was the Genius, Nada was the true god.
The_Templar
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
your Country52798 Posts
April 17 2015 23:56 GMT
#3411
Rush distances look really close, what are they? @Rukis
ModeratorI am still alive, somehow
TL+ Member
Rukis
Profile Joined April 2009
United States252 Posts
April 18 2015 00:04 GMT
#3412
On April 18 2015 08:56 The_Templar wrote:
Rush distances look really close, what are they? @Rukis


well Cross spawned its 50 in-game seconds and adjacent its 45 in-game seconds.
Flash was the Genius, Nada was the true god.
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
April 18 2015 05:03 GMT
#3413
On April 18 2015 08:21 LComteVarauG wrote:+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +
On April 16 2015 17:54 Fatam wrote:
Have a couple specific questions about a very large 2p template I'm working on.
(The few doodads are just a couple looks I'm messing with, but the ones near the main do tell you that the area around those geysers will be unpathable to reduce surface area to the main. May have to toy with the terrain a little there to make sure blink isn't too easy, but anyhow.)

[image loading]

My main concern is.. does zerg have a non terrible 3rd? I feel like it's fine for them assuming the rocks are down, and I think getting them down shouldn't be too bad considering they can walk their first queen down, inject the nat when it's up and then just work on the rocks the whole time (maybe throw the first couple lings at it as well, if needed). But wanted to hear it from a zerg.

Question 2 is @ the lowground expos at 4 and 10 oclock, are they pointless / redundant? I think the highground above them from your opponent's side kind of stretches the area you would have to defend, as opposed to just defending the nearby 4th. So even though they are close in proximity the range you would have to go to defend both is big. But maybe that base is too hard to defend in the first place and should just be deleted. Idk :-P

I'm a Zerg player! :D

In my opinion, the third base is quite difficult to secure for a few reasons. Firstly, even if the queen at the natural works on the rocks non-stop (even with lings), you can't really defend the third whilst it is being constructed and the lings aren't being used for scouting, securing watchtowers, getting in the main to see what your opponent is doing, etc - which is what we build our 4 - 6 early zerglings for. Also, with the rocks where they are, the fairly standard (but already risky) 3 hatch before pool build order is virtually impossible because you cannot defend the third adequately when it is so far away before the rocks are destroyed (especially with the high ground cliff that allows early reapers to attack virtually non-stop).

It could work the way it is, but it would change Zerg play a lot I think, like when the third base on a map is really open, Protoss will almost always do some sort of 2 base timing. If Zerg can't get one more base than it's opponent, we have to do some serious damage to them (and then behind that we can break the rocks, so that would work).

I would suggest blocking (either with rocks or by removing the ramps) all of the other entrances to the third and then removing the rocks from the natural to the third (maybe widen that ramp that goes from the natural to the third too). That way, you get a feasible third that the other races can take easily too because it is an "in-natural" third, and it makes the high ground cliff make more sense. However, later in the game, it can be opened up to the way it is now allowing for massive attacks on both the natural and third. That would create some interesting play around those bases, though then you might need to open the high ground up a bit - think of a Protoss deathball there

About the low ground expansions, I do not think that they are pointless, but they seem very chokey, and I do not really think I can see and Zerg player securing them properly until the base above them is protected. But that's just really my opinion

Btw: I am only Platinum league but I consistently beat diamond/masters players when I do go and "ladder" (i prefer mapping now)

Hope I helped! And well done with such a unique design!

Edit: I really think that the bases above and below the mains (like plausible fourths) are really cool because if you do not spread yourself very thin, that base is available for your opponent (and vice versa).


Thanks for the detailed reply. I suppose it does almost remove double hatch first as a build, which I don't like since my map philosophy is pretty much the opposite (I want as many builds as possible to be viable).

I made an alternate version which makes the 3rd easier for Z. along with a couple other ideas. I'm afraid it's now too good of a zerg map with how open it is, how large it is, and the # of bases.. but maybe it's ok. Let me know which you guys think is better.

original + Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


vs.

alternate + Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


The big rocks are designed to be dynamic, i.e. it will not always be the attacker who wants to kill them. The mineral line/geyser @ the 3rd is only able to be hit by tanks/colossi but if you had an army sharking above your 3rd with said units in it (or maybe just a T bio army who is elevatoring up and down the cliff to harass) it would be beneficial to kill the rocks so you could get up there and flank/trap them. Also once you take your 4th you will of course want those rocks dead.

I worry that the alt version makes the optional 3rd below the main a lot harder to take.. it's pretty much not an optional 3rd anymore (which might be ok given how cancerous mech is atm and how much mech would love that 3rd.. but kinda sucks for P who would probably take that base in some matchups). Maybe a collapsible rock tower to enclose it once you take it could make it still viable as a 3rd, idk.
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
Ohmurai
Profile Joined December 2014
2 Posts
April 18 2015 11:22 GMT
#3414
Hello!
Map name:Xanadu
[image loading]

Size:172x172. Main to Main(worker): 71 Blizzeconds cross, 57 horizontal/vertical.
By all means, give feedback.
WELPAX
Profile Joined March 2012
Switzerland21 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-04-19 01:13:46
April 19 2015 01:00 GMT
#3415
@Zweck; U R kinda right, but I think my MAPS at the current stage aren't toooooo big. They are just big.

At Mapximum-Contest 2 was a description:
2 Player Maps - 140x140 +-40 (180x100 possible)
3 Player Maps - 170x170 +-10 (180x160 possible)

So I submitted Aparus (164x112) AND also I submitted it at TLMC5 :-).

The Feedback I got was:
- Aparus is too shrinked down
- Ways are mostly too narrow
- When rocks in the middle were destroyed, the path to enemie's (4th) base is very short.

So, I fixed all this on Aparus. I hope I did well. --- Still tweaking around and doing stylzzzzz... :-)
Afterwards I will submit...

Here a CaNdY from Aparus E:
APA E4_SCREENSHOT1_4TH_BASE_QM_AND_MIDDLE
[image loading]

@Zweck again :-) ; I like your maps. Number 3 is my favorite :-)

PAcE
Welpax
paCe
LComteVarauG
Profile Joined January 2015
Australia158 Posts
April 19 2015 05:01 GMT
#3416
On April 18 2015 14:03 Fatam wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 18 2015 08:21 LComteVarauG wrote:+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +
On April 16 2015 17:54 Fatam wrote:
Have a couple specific questions about a very large 2p template I'm working on.
(The few doodads are just a couple looks I'm messing with, but the ones near the main do tell you that the area around those geysers will be unpathable to reduce surface area to the main. May have to toy with the terrain a little there to make sure blink isn't too easy, but anyhow.)

[image loading]

My main concern is.. does zerg have a non terrible 3rd? I feel like it's fine for them assuming the rocks are down, and I think getting them down shouldn't be too bad considering they can walk their first queen down, inject the nat when it's up and then just work on the rocks the whole time (maybe throw the first couple lings at it as well, if needed). But wanted to hear it from a zerg.

Question 2 is @ the lowground expos at 4 and 10 oclock, are they pointless / redundant? I think the highground above them from your opponent's side kind of stretches the area you would have to defend, as opposed to just defending the nearby 4th. So even though they are close in proximity the range you would have to go to defend both is big. But maybe that base is too hard to defend in the first place and should just be deleted. Idk :-P

I'm a Zerg player! :D

In my opinion, the third base is quite difficult to secure for a few reasons. Firstly, even if the queen at the natural works on the rocks non-stop (even with lings), you can't really defend the third whilst it is being constructed and the lings aren't being used for scouting, securing watchtowers, getting in the main to see what your opponent is doing, etc - which is what we build our 4 - 6 early zerglings for. Also, with the rocks where they are, the fairly standard (but already risky) 3 hatch before pool build order is virtually impossible because you cannot defend the third adequately when it is so far away before the rocks are destroyed (especially with the high ground cliff that allows early reapers to attack virtually non-stop).

It could work the way it is, but it would change Zerg play a lot I think, like when the third base on a map is really open, Protoss will almost always do some sort of 2 base timing. If Zerg can't get one more base than it's opponent, we have to do some serious damage to them (and then behind that we can break the rocks, so that would work).

I would suggest blocking (either with rocks or by removing the ramps) all of the other entrances to the third and then removing the rocks from the natural to the third (maybe widen that ramp that goes from the natural to the third too). That way, you get a feasible third that the other races can take easily too because it is an "in-natural" third, and it makes the high ground cliff make more sense. However, later in the game, it can be opened up to the way it is now allowing for massive attacks on both the natural and third. That would create some interesting play around those bases, though then you might need to open the high ground up a bit - think of a Protoss deathball there

About the low ground expansions, I do not think that they are pointless, but they seem very chokey, and I do not really think I can see and Zerg player securing them properly until the base above them is protected. But that's just really my opinion

Btw: I am only Platinum league but I consistently beat diamond/masters players when I do go and "ladder" (i prefer mapping now)

Hope I helped! And well done with such a unique design!

Edit: I really think that the bases above and below the mains (like plausible fourths) are really cool because if you do not spread yourself very thin, that base is available for your opponent (and vice versa).


Thanks for the detailed reply. I suppose it does almost remove double hatch first as a build, which I don't like since my map philosophy is pretty much the opposite (I want as many builds as possible to be viable).

I made an alternate version which makes the 3rd easier for Z. along with a couple other ideas. I'm afraid it's now too good of a zerg map with how open it is, how large it is, and the # of bases.. but maybe it's ok. Let me know which you guys think is better.

original + Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


vs.

alternate + Show Spoiler +
[image loading]


The big rocks are designed to be dynamic, i.e. it will not always be the attacker who wants to kill them. The mineral line/geyser @ the 3rd is only able to be hit by tanks/colossi but if you had an army sharking above your 3rd with said units in it (or maybe just a T bio army who is elevatoring up and down the cliff to harass) it would be beneficial to kill the rocks so you could get up there and flank/trap them. Also once you take your 4th you will of course want those rocks dead.

I worry that the alt version makes the optional 3rd below the main a lot harder to take.. it's pretty much not an optional 3rd anymore (which might be ok given how cancerous mech is atm and how much mech would love that 3rd.. but kinda sucks for P who would probably take that base in some matchups). Maybe a collapsible rock tower to enclose it once you take it could make it still viable as a 3rd, idk.


What if you tried this:
[image loading]
I have used that kind of natural/third setup on a few of my maps and I found it encourages macro games whilst leaving many strategies viable (though you might want to fiddle around with the ramps and things to balance it). Perhaps make the backdoor ramps (to either the natural or third) wider, or put in a rock tower in place of one of the rocks.
Author of "[LCV]" maps on SEA and NA. Don't Panic. Member of the clan: JRB (Just Really Bad)
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
April 19 2015 07:41 GMT
#3417
interesting but I think that is kind of a brute force fix, not sure I want that many rocks. I see what you mean though. Gonna think on it some more while I fiddle with other templates
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
JPR
Profile Joined February 2015
Netherlands25 Posts
April 20 2015 19:56 GMT
#3418
Frostburn
172x164

[image loading]

First of all, here is an update on the progress of frostburn. I changed up the center of the map quite a bit with more high and low ground differences as well as some destructable rocks at the potential third.

The next map (unnamed as of yet) will be my second entry for for the TLMC6. It is a 2 player map with some interesting layout and use of destructable rocks, or at least I hope it is interesting.

Unnamed 2 player map
180x132

[image loading]

Feedback on the layout of both maps would be appreciated before I start doodading and polishing them up.
SwedenTheKid
Profile Joined July 2014
567 Posts
April 20 2015 21:29 GMT
#3419
On the second one-

Nat-nat distance is very short with the rocks down, and the 3rd base is to easy IMO. Your forward 4th is way to close to your opponent, and your other option is quite far away. This will be a huge problem for zerg,
Casual Mapmaker
Zweck
Profile Joined February 2015
Germany211 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-04-21 09:32:25
April 21 2015 09:17 GMT
#3420
@JPR: I like frostburn better this way. its more tactical than the previous version.
@Xanadu: Make sure that u cant siege naturals gas from the 4th base, but i think its ok, just not sure

Another pretty standard straight forward layout by me. god i have no idea which ones to pick for TLMC6, i got some more in production :D what do u think about this one?

[image loading]
[image loading]
https://www.instagram.com/instazweck/ ____ behance.net/brachert _____ https://zweckthings.tumblr.com/
Prev 1 169 170 171 172 173 217 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Kung Fu Cup
20:00
2026 Week 28
IntoTheiNu 1145
RotterdaM759
TKL 313
SteadfastSC206
Rex148
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Serral 1182
RotterdaM 759
TKL 313
SteadfastSC 206
Rex 148
LamboSC2 74
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 45869
EffOrt 953
Soma 882
Horang2 803
Larva 487
Leta 456
Light 368
Stork 328
Soulkey 304
Snow 279
[ Show more ]
BeSt 222
actioN 214
Rush 186
Mind 83
hero 77
Creator 56
Hyun 50
Pusan 45
Free 36
sorry 36
Sexy 34
Hm[arnc] 32
ToSsGirL 22
Terrorterran 22
Aegong 21
Bishop 18
Sacsri 18
HiyA 18
Shine 16
JYJ 14
Noble 10
Rock 9
Dota 2
qojqva2811
syndereN626
Counter-Strike
byalli673
x6flipin17
Heroes of the Storm
crisheroes406
Lowko364
Other Games
Gorgc3468
singsing2232
B2W.Neo1029
hiko987
DeMusliM365
Beastyqt358
Liquid`VortiX165
Hui .128
QueenE30
Chillindude25
fpsfer 1
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 10
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• ChaeLyn 5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 1711
League of Legends
• Jankos2119
• TFBlade708
Other Games
• WagamamaTV246
Upcoming Events
IntoTheTV X SOOP
20h 17m
Reynor vs Zoun
Neeb vs Rogue
OSC
1d 8h
FEL
2 days
Patches Events
2 days
AI Arena Tournament
3 days
FEL
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
WardiTV Weekly
4 days
IntoTheTV X SOOP
5 days
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
[ Show More ]
PiGosaur Cup
6 days
The PondCast
6 days
Kung Fu Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-10-20
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
HCC Season 3

Ongoing

Acropolis #5
IPSL Winter 2026-27
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 4
Acropolis #5 - GSC
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026

Upcoming

BSL Season 23
SC4ALL II: Brood War
BSL 23: Non-Korean Championship
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
eXTREMESLAND 2026
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.