|
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin |
On August 31 2016 09:33 Syphon8 wrote:^ I think the core concept of the layout is pretty cool, but it needs to be toned down. There's a lot of unused areas (both dead space and ground space), and drop areas cover a bit too much of the map. Also, the double base right mid makes no sense. I've been staring at http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Gladiator wish we could abuse ramps like that in SC2  ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TIIMARc.jpg) 140x140, spawns are bottom left and top right (1 vs 7). Wanted there to always feel like an equal option for either expansion. The forward third options are equidistant from the highground natural. Top of the 2x ramp into the main can be walled with 2x Depot and a Barracks, or equivalent. Yadda yadda.
Madness. Do you think the rocks in the middle are necessary? I can't see anyone ever taking the time to kill them, since going through that way doesn't seem terribly advantageous. Maybe I'm missing something there.
Interesting main, how many buildings does it take to wall at the "third" choke instead of at the top of your main ramp? I imagine some players would be interested in doing that.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Z0OsSLN.jpg)
just an ugly, simple map I've been messing with. Kind of liking the old concept of "far away yet easy to defend thirds" since you really don't see it much anymore. Yet maybe it makes sense now since mutas are mostly out of fashion and that was one of the reasons it went away. Of course for zerg or whoever you can take the close yet open third if you want.
The center base is a bit different, I thought about adding a ramp to the other side to increase flow but at the end of the day I think it compromises the concept of that base too much, even if the ramp is rocked.
|
@Fatam
The middle rocks were the last thing I added before I thought to show it, and TBH I'm not really sure. The centre path is obviously extremely narrow and "terrain disadvantageous" to push through, but it's only about 90 from nat to nat that way, which is actually longer than I thought it was. So maybe it's not necessary that way.
If you take down all three, you can push faster between the forward thirds at the sides, but again I don't know if it's necessary. Those are all the cases I can think of, but I don't know which combo of the rocks (if any) should remain.
You can wall off the natural pieslice with 3 2x2 buildings and 2 3x3 buildings. (i.e., the choke is 12 tiles wide). I don't think that's overly large, but I suppose it could be toned down a tad.
Your map is cool. I think you should blow up the high-ground pods a little bit (more them 2-4 tiles out it most directions) and make the low-ground a bit chokier. Blodding up the centre bases might make them flow a bit better too.
|
On September 02 2016 05:49 Syphon8 wrote:
@Fatam
The middle rocks were the last thing I added before I thought to show it, and TBH I'm not really sure. The centre path is obviously extremely narrow and "terrain disadvantageous" to push through, but it's only about 90 from nat to nat that way, which is actually longer than I thought it was. So maybe it's not necessary that way.
If you take down all three, you can push faster between the forward thirds at the sides, but again I don't know if it's necessary. Those are all the cases I can think of, but I don't know which combo of the rocks (if any) should remain.
You can wall off the natural pieslice with 3 2x2 buildings and 2 3x3 buildings. (i.e., the choke is 12 tiles wide). I don't think that's overly large, but I suppose it could be toned down a tad.
Your map is cool. I think you should blow up the high-ground pods a little bit (more them 2-4 tiles out it most directions) and make the low-ground a bit chokier. Blodding up the centre bases might make them flow a bit better too.
12 seems about right imo
|
Hi
I want a little help for a map, i really dont know if the third is too far or not :
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i0BsJHV.jpg)
|
On September 16 2016 06:56 Crozo64 wrote:Hi I want a little help for a map, i really dont know if the third is too far or not : + Show Spoiler +
yeah there's no good 3rd option here, the corner bases are too far, and the forward bases are too open and vulnerable
|
i am not dead.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gRx338a.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HSTVZpg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EUUp3ph.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dYJuUYL.jpg)
working on a 4-spawn map. best way to come back, right?
|
|
|
|
|
140x142
Spawns on top left and bottom right
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RshaZ6P.png)
|
On October 05 2016 10:24 VasantVK wrote:140x142 Spawns on top left and bottom right + Show Spoiler +
nat ramps are too wide and it's way too hard to take a 3rd
|
On October 05 2016 10:24 VasantVK wrote:140x142 Spawns on top left and bottom right
First of all don't deform the terrain in pathable regions, it can interfere with gameplay and looks weird. There's a few problems with this map. The main mineral line is way too vulnerable to drops, siege tanks on the low ground etc. There isn't any reasonably easy third to take. But most of all there isn't any unifying idea to this map: there's lots of rocks and low ground paths and funky features all over the place, but there isn't any flow to the map, anything to tie it all together. If you want to make a map focused on for example cool collapsible rock tower usage, do it, but don't cram in so many other seemingly random features.
|
160x160
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YZKQTEH.jpg)
Thanks for the advice! I decided to make a new map integrating your advice from the past 2 maps, ZigguratOfUr. How is the concept of this map?
|
On October 09 2016 11:06 VasantVK wrote:160x160 Thanks for the advice! I decided to make a new map integrating your advice from the past 2 maps, ZigguratOfUr. How is the concept of this map?
I like this one quite a bit better than the previous two. The layout of the middle of the map in particular is very neat, especially if you make the centre bases a bit easier to take. I'd add a gap besides the main and move the base there further away from it, since right now it seems abusable by siege tanks (at a glance a siege tank there can maybe hit the main geyser?). The corners of the map still feel a bit disconnected--you could shrink the map overall to help that; 160x160 is a bit too much.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NaG6hPd.png)
152x156
Here is an updated version. Unfortunately I don't think I could get it lower than what I have in this map due to the middle taking up a lot of space. I tried to make this version connect to the sides more. Let me also say, I will add foliage to the surrounding areas covering most the map, so the sides will be covered. How are the rock placements and what should I do with the empty spaces? I want to add more, but not sure if I should and where.
|
132x96
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PKqCJ1t.png)
Here's another map I made. This one is a lot smaller and features some tight pathing areas and some LoS blockers. There is also a small "island" to the bottom of the map which is only accessible by air drops, and it can also allow for stalker ambushes, reaper jumps, etc. Also, if you're wondering why the 2 middle bases (top and bottom) look weird, it's because the symmetry didn't allow me to have a perfect 5 square base area. Can I have some feedback on it?
|
On October 16 2016 23:24 VasantVK wrote:152x156 Here is an updated version. Unfortunately I don't think I could get it lower than what I have in this map due to the middle taking up a lot of space. I tried to make this version connect to the sides more. Let me also say, I will add foliage to the surrounding areas covering most the map, so the sides will be covered. How are the rock placements and what should I do with the empty spaces? I want to add more, but not sure if I should and where.
It's better. The rock placements are fine as they are I think--this map doesn't really need more of them. The middle bases could still be made more easy to expand to by having a ramp facing towards the main added to them.
On October 24 2016 04:29 VasantVK wrote:132x96 Here's another map I made. This one is a lot smaller and features some tight pathing areas and some LoS blockers. There is also a small "island" to the bottom of the map which is only accessible by air drops, and it can also allow for stalker ambushes, reaper jumps, etc. Also, if you're wondering why the 2 middle bases (top and bottom) look weird, it's because the symmetry didn't allow me to have a perfect 5 square base area. Can I have some feedback on it?
This map is too small and lacks breathing room. All the bases lay very close together and are very vulnerable. The backdoor nat can easily be shot at from across the gap. All the middle bases are so tied together as to be impossible to hold. And the island bases won't ever be used due to how close everything is at the top of the map. If you want to make a small "rush" map you need to make sure the whole map space will be used, and scale down the number of bases to fit it.
|
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
Here's an updated version of both.
1. I added LoS bushes to make the low ground pathing viable. Also, added another ramp like you suggested to the middle, but made it small as to discourage avoiding the open paths.
2. This map has 10 bases in total as compared to the 14 from the last ones, but I think they are farther apart and much more spaced out. I got rid of some of the tight paths and added ramps instead to connect the map.
|
the 2nd map is still very small and tight, and the forward bases are still too close. the entire map simply needs to be bigger, and the terrain features expanded.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mZnWYU7.png)
Here is an updated version of the first one. The changes: Added trees (obstructs pathing as well but provides some LoS blocking near the edges), added xel'naga tower, adjusted gap near xel'naga tower pathway, and shortened the ramp on other base's side as well as made some other platform adjustments.
|
Match Point re-imagining for LotV.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1AIheim.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vf5dAXB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dbr1h9v.png)
