I don't think that the low ground fifths are as affected by circle syndrome as you do. I think the 9 o'clock one is for the bottom left player and the 3 o'clock one for the top right. My reasoning is that player should have control of the high ground above the fifth by that time, since they'd have already expanded to the gold and held onto that area. If this turns out to be an issue, I think I can fix it by narrowing the vertical path from the counterclockwise third. I could even put a collapsible rock tower somewhere on that path to give the option to close it temporarily.

I too was thinking about creating a path and blocking it with rocks where you drew! I'm going to go whip up some changes.
I don't think I want to raise the center anymore though. Thanks for the feedback!

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 21 2017 06:03 GMT

#4022

After some more modifications:

[image loading]

Samro225am

Germany982 Posts

February 21 2017 07:12 GMT

#4023

On February 21 2017 15:03 Antares777 wrote:
After some more modifications:
+ Show Spoiler +

i like how you create lanes and use the rocks to open up a very dense network of paths. Some good questions on how a map should restrict and open up possibilities.

just from the positioning the high ground with the gold base is a very good forward position to defend the line of regular bases along the borders. It can be strengthened when you pull the ramp (towards away side/middle) closer to the base. While it is easier to grab the gold with the rocks towards centre in place, the forward position would be more interesting with a ramp down instead of rock here (flat centre path > so the XWT would be on a very narrow path instead of a dead end >> you could use a small rock if you want to restrict movement through or the use of the XWT). I would like to question that the base has to be a gold base. I'd work out the layout first and then decide on gold or regular base. Also i see the logic behind the rocks at the very sides, but i would move these further out and towards the corner bases instead to allow for some movement here towards centre and strengthen the middle/gold highborn area. The optional path here is superfluous and only of interest much later in game.

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 21 2017 17:34 GMT

#4024

I don't really like the idea of opening up a path where the towers are. I just don't think it's necessary, and I enjoy having the towers being in a location that takes a little more effort to use, in this case, being forced to walk around the obstruction. I am going to shrink the obstruction though so it's a little less rigid.

I was more worried about the golds being too strong than too weak, since they are in a very strong position. I wanted to weaken them by keep the ramps further away and keeping the center on even level with the base, so once the rocks are down there's no height advantage for the defender. The bases may be too vulnerable though. If I were to push any of the ramps in, it'd be the ones that head to the towers.

I want to try to keep the bases there gold, so I'm going to try to have them a little bit on the riskier side. If I were to change them to regular bases, I would be able to shrink chokes and make it more defensible without worrying too much. If I make the golds too defensible, I could easily run into issues though.

The outer pathways are kinda superfluous, but they are still useful for evading the towers (the range is difficult to see in the image unfortunately). They are also necessary for attacking certain areas until some of the rocks are taken out. I'm unsure about moving the low ground rocks closer to the corner expansions.

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 21 2017 17:41 GMT

#4025

Another edit:

[image loading]

SwedenTheKid

567 Posts

February 22 2017 04:50 GMT

#4026

I like where it’s heading. I understand why you might want to make the 4th more standard due to the rest of the map, but I wonder if there might be a way to make the gold and forward 4th/5th more important in the midgame. Maybe make the ramp to the 4th 1x1 size? But I guess you’re already moving towards a more open ramp so it’s up to you. Not sure but good map.

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 22 2017 16:37 GMT

#4027

Which fourth; the corner ones or the forward ones? I've changed up the forward fourth's ramps a bit and now have a 1x ramp pointed towards the natural in addition to the 3x ramp pointing towards the center. I'm considering partially blocking the 3x ramp with 6x6 rocks to make it initially 1x. I could make them both 2x ramps and put collapsible towers on the one facing the center, that's another idea. I'm not quite satisfied with the forward fourths tbh and keep fiddling around with them.

I like the corner fourths just how they are though. I think shrinking the 3x ramp will make them too easy to hold, since they are already pretty easy to defend since they only have one entrance.

SwedenTheKid

567 Posts

February 22 2017 16:54 GMT

#4028

That makes sense, I was talking about the corner 4ths, but the 1x1 ramp idea probably doesn’t work here.

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 22 2017 18:42 GMT

#4029

I think I'm going to try two 2x ramps, one toward the natural and one toward the center with a collapsible rock that can block it and see how that goes.

I'm also working on an experimental map.

[image loading]

Bounds: 132x124. Double inbase expansion. Backdoor. Island. Four gold bases blocked by those unbuildable plates. Fast rush distance that can become faster by removing the rocks in the center. I am mainly trying to make a macro map the size of a rush map.

EDIT: I apparently don't know how to create collapsible rock towers in the editor... Gotta go hit the YouTube and study up.

Fatam

1986 Posts

February 23 2017 00:35 GMT

#4030

taking a 4th seems pretty tough there

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 23 2017 01:50 GMT

#4031

Updated both concepts.

[image loading]

Umbilicus1

1 Post

February 25 2017 10:11 GMT

#4032

A layout concept i have been working on.
Tell me your thoughts.

Kand1

Germany17 Posts

February 28 2017 14:46 GMT

#4033

Hey there,

I'm Kand1 and I'm pretty new to mapping. Inspired by the map contest I wanted to give it a try and here is what I've come up with

Frozen Canyon
+ Show Spoiler +

I haven't seen any maps with a natural pocket towards the front like in this map (and there is probably a reason for it..) and I dont know if it is balanced or not but I'm sure you'll tell me

So if you want to, give it a try and give me some feedback on how I could improve it or let me know if I made some fundamental mistakes.
The map is published on the EU server as Frozen Canyon.

gl hf

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

February 28 2017 16:29 GMT

#4034

I may be a little biased here when I say this, but as a Zerg player in ZvT I'm going to be terrified of getting dropped somewhere. There's a lot of space for drops due to the main and natural being connected like this, and the drops have a higher potential to deal damage due to the long ground distances. If my army was in the middle of the map and I got dropped in my natural, I'd have to go all the way back to my main to get to my natural.

I want to draw some comparisons to King Sejong Station. On this map, the natural has a closer ground distance to more forward positions on the map.

As a suggestion, maybe move the backdoor from the main to the natural. That way, you can open a path there and make it easier to defend in later game. You could also push the natural closer to the main. That would minimize the overall size of the base, decreasing the surface area for drops and make it easier to defend the natural.

If this is your first map, this is really good.

Kand1

Germany17 Posts

February 28 2017 23:03 GMT

#4035

Hey Antares777,

Thanks a lot for the feedback

I think you have a good point with the drops in the natural...I actually had a ramp with rocks in the natural that went towards the space between 5 and 6 in one of the first versions of the map.. do you think that would be better than the one in the main? Or schould I make both, in the main and the natural? Or rather towards the other side?
Also I will try to move the natural closer to the main and have it less exposed for drops..

I actually did a handfull of maps last year after the map contest but havent touched the editor since then.
So this is not my very first map, but it is the first one I worked on up to this level.. the other ones usally didn't make it past the stage of doodles and rough ideas.
But besides the strategic part of mapdesign I feel I have still a lot of trouble choosing the right doodads and have the right balance between not enough and way too much... I just never know wich one it is

I will work some more on the map and give you an update .

Kand1

Germany17 Posts

March 01 2017 12:31 GMT

#4036

I did a qiuck edit in photoshop
do you think something like this would be better?
looks kindof odd to me..

+ Show Spoiler +

Or maby I will put the mineralline on the left side of the base.. that might be better

Kand1

Germany17 Posts

March 02 2017 14:34 GMT

#4037

Update on Frozen Canyon

[image loading]

redit the main/natural and slightly repositioned the watchtowers

current version is uploaded on EU server as Frozen Canyon v.1.12 ... give it a try

SwedenTheKid

567 Posts

March 04 2017 02:26 GMT

#4038

Well, I'm back. My computer is currently running on the backup drive, so its pretty hard for me to make maps quickly or test them. I sketched out this though, it's 152x152 which might be too small, due to the backdoor and short rush distance with the Match Point inspired small ramp up to the natural/3rd. The Main is the highest highground base.

There's a lot of stuff that I could do to it. Collapsible Rocks at the backdoor natural's ramp would be good. Maybe making the map 160x160+ playable bounds. Or maybe the layout is just crap, idk.

[image loading]