Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 217

Post a Reply

Prev 1 215 216 217

Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin

Legan

Finland215 Posts

April 30 2021 18:07 GMT

#4321

On April 30 2021 23:08 bleakgh wrote:

Show nested quote +

I solved your problem by changing the start locations. Maybe you would have thought of that if you weren't so busy being a rude snarky kid.

Sorry if I hurt you.

Where you moved the starting locations to? You didn't mention that.

bleakgh

6 Posts

May 02 2021 21:35 GMT

#4322

On May 01 2021 03:07 Legan wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sorry if I hurt you.

Where you moved the starting locations to? You didn't mention that.

The top left and top right so they would have high ground. :D

amak

United States1 Post

September 05 2021 23:23 GMT

#4323

Full Map Name: Lost Sara
Map Bounds: 177x177
Suggested Players: 2v2 (top vs bottom team placement support)
Published servers: NA and EU

Idea: I wanted a team map where FFA play was still possible so I went with 4 main basses.

Previews
+ Show Spoiler +

Map:

Pathing:

Labels:

I would love feedback on this map!

Legan

Finland215 Posts

September 06 2021 18:54 GMT

#4324

On September 06 2021 08:23 amak wrote:
Full Map Name: Lost Sara
Map Bounds: 177x177
Suggested Players: 2v2 (top vs bottom team placement support)
Published servers: NA and EU

Idea: I wanted a team map where FFA play was still possible so I went with 4 main basses.

Previews
+ Show Spoiler +

Map:

Pathing:

Labels:

I would love feedback on this map!

A lot of things have just wrong proportions. Try to move an army around the map. Naturals choke need to be wall able with three 3x3 buildings and a gap for doorman. 1x ramp is only used at main usually. 2x ramp is choked ramp that hard for bigger armies. 3x ramp is the most standard ramp. It is a bit choked. 4x ramp is big ramp not really choked. Use diagonal ramps everywhere the ramp must be wall-able. Use the sizes of ramps as comparison for chokes.

The layout is mess. Everything blocked off making this long path, then all space at middle is wasted on this big airspace that forces everything to the sides where all chokes are too tight.

You should properly use pathing paint.

Doodads obscuring can be big problem even when it is small part. Thus having large areas that just allow unit under trees etc. isn't okay.

You are probably using wrong map size. You should use playable not total. Also you can use data -> export map image for better overview, and then gimp or something to convert to jpg/png..

Just use more standard main and natural setup. You can use creep to measure size of bases and distances between them.
1 tumor between main and natural max. 1-2 tumors between natural and third. About 2 tumors for further bases. Check existing maps. You can load them from the editor.

Use standard mineral lines. Either copy from ladder or look for guide on this forum. Also don't have mineral lines, geysers or main buildings that hinder army movement and defensive positions.

You should test what is suitable rush distances by sending worker from top of the main ramp to top of the other main ramp. Check that game speed is faster before testing. For 1v1 Ramp to Ramp should be ~34-38 seconds. Check 2v2 maps.

dezi

Germany1478 Posts

September 10 2021 09:32 GMT

#4325

It's nice to see you guys still going strong after all these years. Cheers!

OmniSkeptic

5 Posts

October 10 2021 20:24 GMT

#4326

Map playable size is 158x132. I wanted to explore what happens as a consequence of having a snaking main and natural ramp (where they oppose eachother). I also wanted to try out a third that has a defendable ramp like in the old days of HotS, but tried to balance it for LotV by simultaneously choking out the expanding player from rushing up to defend it if they are already out of position (as well as providing destructible rocks which open up the ramp as the match progresses). When you add all this up, you start to get a quite choky side of the map so I tried to keep the line-third base (as opposed to triangle) a bit more wide open to compensate. Thoughts, criticisms, etc? Map is available on NA under "Monastery LE" if you wanted to check some of the more nuanced things meant to balance it (like the doodad placement next to cliffs preventing blink/ siege tank abuse)

[image loading]

Legan

Finland215 Posts

October 11 2021 00:53 GMT

#4327

On October 11 2021 05:24 OmniSkeptic wrote:
Map playable size is 158x132. I wanted to explore what happens as a consequence of having a snaking main and natural ramp (where they oppose eachother). I also wanted to try out a third that has a defendable ramp like in the old days of HotS, but tried to balance it for LotV by simultaneously choking out the expanding player from rushing up to defend it if they are already out of position (as well as providing destructible rocks which open up the ramp as the match progresses). When you add all this up, you start to get a quite choky side of the map so I tried to keep the line-third base (as opposed to triangle) a bit more wide open to compensate. Thoughts, criticisms, etc? Map is available on NA under "Monastery LE" if you wanted to check some of the more nuanced things meant to balance it (like the doodad placement next to cliffs preventing blink/ siege tank abuse)

[image loading]

Hmm where to start. The corner feels messy as moving through it or attacking it comes from angles that feel overly forced. There isn't other reason to move through the two corner bases than attack. Also conceives aren't the best.

The map is overall bit big 132x158 = 20 856 considering 16-18k being the more standard, but I don't mind as I do a lot of 19-20k maps.

For main and natural I would first check if Zerg can wall properly. The ramp seem bit far away for Hatchery's creep to reach. The 1x ramp to third may be a overkill as it feels quite easy to move towards the natural instead of attacking the third. This would force defender down the small ramp. However attacking natural instead opens attacker for flanking from the third's ramp.
Maybe try separate the attack path to natural and to the third bit more.

The weird "arms" like the one behind the third is really good for hiding proxies, drops, and nydus. So you should be careful with them.

Outward bases could use some space behind mineral lines for static defense and drops. Natural may have some cannon rush spots. 2 pylons spat are generally bad. 3 pylons spot depend heavily how much space cannoner is given and what is reached by the cannons.4 pylon spots are impossible to avoid really.

Mineral lines that are usually target of runbys like natural and third could use some mineral pockets (Two forward, one backward batches) like the main mineral line has two. The pockets lets you easily stack workers against melee units. Also
the horivontal and vertical mineral lines are bit less efficient compared to the diagonal used in main. This only matters early when lower income changes how timings works.

The middle is weird as it feels very open and unstructured comapared to most of the recent ones. The biggest question is how much the vertical cliff limits left to right movement. It currently feel weird when you try to figure out what path you would take from 3 o'clock base to 9 o'clock base and how it would differ from third to third route. Xel'naga tower may be too good for attacker.

Aesthetic wise there is bit of confusion caused by using nearly the same texturing for multiple levels. When using camera hotkeys to move you want to be able to know from textures where you are instantly. Now some low ground bases feel like they should be high ground and some open areas feel too same. Also having some doodads next to cliff help to communicate what can be jumped by reaper and makes paths overall clearler You don't have many reasons to hug a cliff from low ground.

OmniSkeptic

5 Posts

October 11 2021 02:53 GMT

#4328

I feel like bases taken are super clustered towards the main in SC2 compared to BW so I tried to design the corner bases to be sort of defensible. The problem is to make a base defendable you end up often creating these little pocket bases with only one entrance like in the corners of Jagannatha which I'm not a fan of because it's a game of "whoever gets there first". So the idea was to have two entrances, where one is more or less owned by the expanding player and the other is sort of out-of-the-way.

The map is overall bit big 132x158 = 20 856 considering 16-18k being the more standard, but I don't mind as I do a lot of 19-20k maps.

It's certainly larger, although I think the straight math is a bit misleading because there's absolutely tons of airspace around the edges of the map.

For main and natural I would first check if Zerg can wall properly.

I don't play Zerg and it shows. Is it absolutely necessary to have the zerg be able to immediately wall without having to use a creep tumor first? I don't think this sort of snake design is ever able to have the hatchery reach without exposing the natural mineral line.

The 1x ramp to third may be a overkill as it feels quite easy to move towards the natural instead of attacking the third. This would force defender down the small ramp. However attacking natural instead opens attacker for flanking from the third's ramp.
Maybe try separate the attack path to natural and to the third bit more.

You're sort of describing the whole point

The weird "arms" like the one behind the third is really good for hiding proxies, drops, and nydus. So you should be careful with them.

When a map has a place specifically made for proxies, it's not a hiding place. Drops... meh? It's okay for drops I guess but you can just as easily take advantage of it defensively (taking the triangle third means your stalkers will be in blink range of it and thus able to defend the main from drops). I imagine a zerg moving their creep queens at the third there to deflect a drop, for instance, or putting a spore up.

Outward bases could use some space behind mineral lines for static defense and drops. Natural may have some cannon rush spots. 2 pylons spat are generally bad. 3 pylons spot depend heavily how much space cannoner is given and what is reached by the cannons.4 pylon spots are impossible to avoid really.

Good points. Fix both of those problems in the next iteration hopefully.

mineral pockets.

What's the layout for mineral pockets on a vertical base? Didn't know that was possible without screwing the layout.

The biggest question is how much the vertical cliff limits left to right movement. It currently feel weird when you try to figure out what path you would take from 3 o'clock base to 9 o'clock base and how it would differ from third to third route.

I'll take that as a positive thing because limiting horizontal movement is precisely what that middleleft and middleright cliff is for. I realized that if you take the line third and continue taking a fourth in that direction, your opponent can walk up the triangle third and just cut off your natural from your third with tanks or what have you while pressuring the main. The cliff makes a rotation up to the triangle third take much longer and gives the defender time to intercept. 3->9 oclock would have you take the smaller ramps by default.

Xel'naga tower may be too good for attacker.

I'm torn about this too. If you have both towers your opponent can actually still run some units directly through the centre of the map without being spotted. I've been thinking about moving each tower one or two squares away from eachother to make the middle just have a bit more room of less vision so that theoretically a whole army could squeeze by without being seen.

You don't have many reasons to hug a cliff from low ground.

Blink and Siege Tanks on Oxide would like to have a word.

OmniSkeptic

5 Posts

October 15 2021 17:52 GMT

#4329

I tested the map out a bit more and I'm convinced you're right that it's actually too easy for someone to out-rotate the defender by forcing them to walk up and down the small third base ramp in order to defend the threat of just attacking the natural. Do you think that this is a sufficient enough walk-around distance to compensate without making it too hard to get a concave to defensively hold the ramp coming downwards from the centre of the map?

Other changes include more space/ less doodads behind minerals for easier AA defense, an unbuildable zone where the main meets the the high ground third (covered in rocks) making proxy void less viable, the centre of the map now has LOS blockers and a tighter 2 path permanent choke to keep the centre having at least one more heavily choked area to slow down pushes, also incentivizing destruction of the low third ground rocks. Xel'Naga towers have less range and just barely can't see the centre choke (while just barely being able to see all of the two ramps to the north/south of them, islands between nat and fourth have been shortened to mitigate tank abuse

EDIT: I'm now concerned that zerg will have a tough time defensively because now you can put a tank behind that chasm.

[image loading]