• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 01:34
CET 07:34
KST 15:34
  • 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
RSL Revival - 2025 Season Finals Preview8RSL Season 3 - Playoffs Preview0RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups C & D Preview0RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups A & B Preview2TL.net Map Contest #21: Winners12
Community News
ComeBackTV's documentary on Byun's Career !0Weekly Cups (Dec 8-14): MaxPax, Clem, Cure win0Weekly Cups (Dec 1-7): Clem doubles, Solar gets over the hump1Weekly Cups (Nov 24-30): MaxPax, Clem, herO win2BGE Stara Zagora 2026 announced15
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Dec 8-14): MaxPax, Clem, Cure win Did they add GM to 2v2? ComeBackTV's documentary on Byun's Career ! RSL Revival - 2025 Season Finals Preview Weekly Cups (Dec 1-7): Clem doubles, Solar gets over the hump
Tourneys
$5,000+ WardiTV 2025 Championship StarCraft2.fi 15th Anniversary Cup RSL Offline Finals Info - Dec 13 and 14! Tenacious Turtle Tussle 2025 RSL Offline Finals Dates + Ticket Sales!
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 504 Retribution Mutation # 503 Fowl Play Mutation # 502 Negative Reinforcement Mutation # 501 Price of Progress
Brood War
General
FlaSh on: Biggest Problem With SnOw's Playstyle How Rain Became ProGamer in Just 3 Months [BSL21] RO8 Bracket & Prediction Contest BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[ASL20] Grand Finals [BSL21] RO8 - Day 2 - Sunday 21:00 CET [BSL21] RO8 - Day 1 - Saturday 21:00 CET Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
Current Meta Simple Questions, Simple Answers Game Theory for Starcraft Fighting Spirit mining rates
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Dawn of War IV ZeroSpace Megathread The 2048 Game Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas Survivor II: The Amazon Sengoku Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine YouTube Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
White-Ra Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TL+ Announced Where to ask questions and add stream?
Blogs
How Sleep Deprivation Affect…
TrAiDoS
I decided to write a webnov…
DjKniteX
James Bond movies ranking - pa…
Topin
Thanks for the RSL
Hildegard
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1640 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
183 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 Country52797 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.
Moderatorshe/her
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 Country52797 Posts
April 17 2015 23:56 GMT
#3411
Rush distances look really close, what are they? @Rukis
Moderatorshe/her
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
Next event in 3h 26m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft630
RuFF_SC2 182
SortOf 70
StarCraft: Brood War
Shuttle 1319
Aegong 80
Mong 32
Sacsri 29
Hm[arnc] 21
Noble 17
ZergMaN 17
Icarus 9
Dota 2
monkeys_forever638
League of Legends
JimRising 650
C9.Mang0473
Other Games
summit1g10943
Mew2King49
Trikslyr36
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick825
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Light_VIP 95
• Berry_CruncH36
• Kozan
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• Migwel
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• RayReign 24
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Rush1587
• Lourlo1408
• HappyZerGling138
Other Games
• Scarra3909
Upcoming Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3h 26m
WardiTV 2025
5h 26m
Spirit vs YoungYakov
Rogue vs Nice
Scarlett vs Reynor
TBD vs Clem
uThermal vs Shameless
PiGosaur Cup
18h 26m
WardiTV 2025
1d 5h
MaNa vs Gerald
TBD vs MaxPax
ByuN vs TBD
TBD vs ShoWTimE
OSC
1d 8h
YoungYakov vs Mixu
ForJumy vs TBD
Percival vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
The PondCast
2 days
WardiTV 2025
2 days
Cure vs Creator
TBD vs Solar
WardiTV 2025
3 days
OSC
3 days
CranKy Ducklings
4 days
[ Show More ]
SC Evo League
4 days
Ladder Legends
4 days
BSL 21
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
Ladder Legends
5 days
BSL 21
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Monday Night Weeklies
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #4 - TS3
RSL Offline Finals
Kuram Kup

Ongoing

C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 4
YSL S2
BSL Season 21
Slon Tour Season 2
WardiTV 2025
META Madness #9
SL Budapest Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22

Upcoming

CSL 2025 WINTER (S19)
BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
Bellum Gens Elite Stara Zagora 2026
HSC XXVIII
Big Gabe Cup #3
ESL Pro League Season 23
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual
eXTREMESLAND 2025
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 © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.