EPT
But those are just my personal thoughts. The rocks is really the only "must change" thing imo.
Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 36
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
But those are just my personal thoughts. The rocks is really the only "must change" thing imo. | ||
Coppermantis
United States845 Posts
The rocks, yeah, those were a bad idea. I'll remove those and open up the fourth but keep the ramp setup as is for now. | ||
|
SigmaFiE
United States333 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kyJy8yp.jpg) | ||
|
lorestarcraft
United States1049 Posts
On January 24 2013 04:21 SigmaFiE wrote: Just thought I would share what I am working on for HotS at the moment. Still not happy by any means Feels like Broodwar, but i'm a little concerned about split-map stuff, not that it's necessarily always a bad thing. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
| ||
|
fryedman
United States10 Posts
On January 24 2013 05:41 SiskosGoatee wrote: Seems like almost impossible to split the map here, too many entry paths from one side to another, you have to guard them all. I agree, the xel's are placed well but their coverage is not enough! I sugest maybe some disctruable debree or something along those lines | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
| ||
|
iamcaustic
Canada1509 Posts
On January 24 2013 04:21 SigmaFiE wrote: Just thought I would share what I am working on for HotS at the moment. Still not happy by any means Oh, this has me genuinely curious. What are the map dimensions? My biggest concern about the map would be the far corners; they seem designed to provide a path for one's main army, but are so far out of position I'd be surprised if they're ever used for that purpose. The high ground pods in the middle also have me pondering a bit; trying to figure out their role other than being there for the sake of being there. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
Tell me what you think: (bounds are 166x144) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eLiqc1x.jpg) Some explanation on the map and my thoughts: Ever since Kespa released Bifrost I was trying to make a cool use of their idea, a flat entrance to the main. After some thoughts and tries I had a basic layout and went to try it. After testing the size I found out that spreading creep to the natural will be too hard on my map on what was its current form. I thought about putting that layout to rest, but then it hit me and I went to the new tool Blizzard gave us, the creep generator. Yes you heard it right, the entrance is filled with creep instead of unbuildable rocks. What this do is that only 2 tumors are required to get creep to the natural, and that runbys are slightly better (even though the small choke kinda negates this). I hope that more map makers will try to use this on their maps, because I think that when used right the creep brush is defiantly not only for aesthetics or arcade games. Okay, so after we are done with the cool entrance we are going to look at the natural entrances. I never seen anyone use this, but I assume it was at least tested, since its a pretty basic idea, instead of one ramp, we have two ramps. This creates a whole new set of rules for both the defender and the attacker, which is also good and bad at the same time. With two ramps instead of one, expanding with static defenses is still possible, but its weaker than the standard one ramp style. This In my opinion is good, since it also makes expanding with units stronger (able to move between ramps). Having two ramps forces the attacker to split his units into two groups when facing a expand with units, but versus an expand with static defense the attacker can attack only one side, thus requiring much more resources spent on defense than on normal naturals. Overall I think this kind of natural favors aggressive players, which is good, cause while standard macro games are fun, they became the ultimate norm, which is boring, and while you can do what GOM does and force the player to not take an early 3rd, I think that making aggressive play better while still allowing greedy or passive play to exist will make the map much more fun to watch and to play on. But of course it is yet to be tested. These two ideas are the most revolutionary, the rest of the map is pretty normal, you can choose your third based on your playstyle and the matchup, and the towers cover the main paths while there are longer routes that allow you to avoid the towers (or you can break the rocks, then you have a short path with no vision cover from the towers, but it is a small path). Overall I think the map favors runbys, drops and other mobile forces, which are fun to watch. Things I am wondering if I should do: -Putting supply depots on top of the ramps for easier wall ins. (possible to put only a depot on only 1 ramp too) -Making it possible for blink stalkers to blink in and out of the main, which will make for even more harass focus games since it will be easier for Protoss to harass (Protoss does not gain from easier runbys). I am not sure on that cause there are already many chokes on the map, and because no main ramp means that blink all ins can blink over force fields (this is a very hard decision). -Change the natual so it is closer to the main. I am not sure if it is a problem or not, but it seems to me that the main and the nat are pretty far apart, which will make defending air harass harder then normal. The main problem with this that the whole layout will be kinda messes and it will require a whole remake of the 4 first bases. I prefer it the way it currently is, but I see it being a problem. Overall that is my map, it does not have a name and it is not published but I still managed to write a lot on it, because its not only about it, but its about the ideas behind it. Maybe I should have made a thread about it instead of writing it here  | ||
|
Elche
Finland170 Posts
The walls of light are made to work as LOS blockers. Map name: Avaruus (working title) Map has been published already to HOTS beta but I'm constantly making changes/improvements. Bounds are 136x136. My biggest problem with current maps is the use of watchtowers, usually they are placed in positions that you would like to have your army anyway which leads to camping and non-dynamic gameplay. For the current ladder map-pool pretty much Akilon flats is the only map I think has good watchtower placement. Watchtowers in this map are placed on the high ground, overlooking path between the 3/4th bases but not covering the shortest routes from main to main. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YtYkqsc.jpg) | ||
|
SigmaFiE
United States333 Posts
On January 24 2013 08:20 iamcaustic wrote: Oh, this has me genuinely curious. What are the map dimensions? My biggest concern about the map would be the far corners; they seem designed to provide a path for one's main army, but are so far out of position I'd be surprised if they're ever used for that purpose. The high ground pods in the middle also have me pondering a bit; trying to figure out their role other than being there for the sake of being there. Map dimensions are 128 x 128. So a little smaller map. I originally started out just doing a remake of Conquer Fever (see below) ![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/%284%29Conquer%20Fever3.jpg) But I screwed up! So i resorted to changing it into a 2 player map. So.... it's a serious work in progress with probably relatively little creativity at the moment - The corners -- I tried a couple different things and limiting the map to 5 bases, but I felt like there was so much space left that I decided to bump it up to 6 bases and design around that. I wanted the option to give a serious attack on the fourth base from the far side, which is why such width for it. We'll see -- I'm not hopeful but I'll leave it for the time being. But also, you could build a wall inside the line of sight blockers if you like. So it does present an odd sort of hidden attack opportunity for protoss whereas terran and zerg can utilize air space and/or space control units. I just tested siege ranges, and it's pretty consistent so I am happy there. - High ground pods -- Which ones? Do you means by base 4 or just as you leave your main base (just outside the 2 entrances w/ the LOS blocks connecting)? If the former, I am playing around with rock towers so it exists originally from that. I like it though as an option to do a drop against that particular base with siege weapons, or zerg to pull tanks onto it w/ vipers and get them out of the way, once again -- just kinda testing stuff at the moment more or less on just about everything in this map. It's a fiddling type of map :D | ||
|
FrozenProbe
Italy276 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Jx5Ty2J.jpg) | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
On January 25 2013 08:40 AngryPenguin wrote: This is my first map, at least the concept. It's a pretty big map, 4 spawns and more "broodwarish" Its really not obvious where the bases are, I suggest you place them and then come back here so its easier to judge the map. You can simply use command centers if you don't want to put full mineral lines, but its preferable that all non-aesthetics will be present. | ||
|
monitor
United States2403 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MzYgLUg.jpg) Ideally a counterclockwise spawning zerg can take the middle expo with minimal defending troubles. I arranged the ramps to discourage large scale attacks. Also zerg can easily connect with creep and abuse mobility with the open spaces. Or they could take a third that isn't anywhere near their main/nat like in bw. | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
Best 4 player rotational I've seen in a while. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
Even without a backdoor it seems like a cool map, but I wonder how it will be played out, since it really not obvious. | ||
|
FrozenProbe
Italy276 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LAQFYfp.jpg) added points and main mineral and gas. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On January 25 2013 11:14 monitor wrote: Say you in ZvT spawn clockwise to a T. they take the middle base as their fourth with a Pf, hard to ever get out of, they have a lowground base to easily assault, you can never take that as your fourth yourself, waay too close to the T third.Messing with some ideas... Ideally a counterclockwise spawning zerg can take the middle expo with minimal defending troubles. I arranged the ramps to discourage large scale attacks. Also zerg can easily connect with creep and abuse mobility with the open spaces. Or they could take a third that isn't anywhere near their main/nat like in bw. I also don't think 3 bases behind a single choke is a good idea. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/X5sc6hCl.jpg) All hail the Icarus Clone syndrome, daybreak clone syndrom is getting old. | ||
|
monitor
United States2403 Posts
On January 26 2013 03:33 SiskosGoatee wrote: Say you in ZvT spawn clockwise to a T. they take the middle base as their fourth with a Pf, hard to ever get out of, they have a lowground base to easily assault, you can never take that as your fourth yourself, waay too close to the T third. I also don't think 3 bases behind a single choke is a good idea. Good point about PFing the middle. I'll consider a change. Something like simply raising the main + raising the nat would solve it entirely imo (and might help ZvX spawning clockwise too). I disagree with the 3 base behind a single choke being bad sentiment. In general, you're probably right. But this is a specific design to make it work. The third base is 1g5m and its lowground with a 3x ramp. It's intended to be different than most maps. Turtling may be more viable than other maps but I hope not. If it is, I can just lower the mineral or gas count (like a super slow geyser!) so you have to expand quicker. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BmMNyT4.jpg) just a quickie hots template, 130x130. standard main/nat, then there's an open close 3rd and a protected far 3rd. The protected 3rd can be harassed a bit via the back nook thing/killing the rock tower to stop mining on 4 of the minerals until the defender deals with it. I initially tried having the rocks land on 1 geyser and some minerals, but rocks falling on a geyser (even if there's no refinery on it) kills the geyser! So that was too OP. The corner bases are meant to be ambiguous. I like having that highground inbetween the corner base and that 4th, as it creates a powerful point of interest that is very far from the center of the map. Healing shrines on the lowground, right below a cliff so they aren't too safe. I need to do more testing with rock towers, but here are the rules I know so far: - if the rock tower falls on a building, it kills the building(s) if they are sub-500 hp (need to double check that # but I think that's right) and the 2000 hp standard rocks appear.. so pylons, depots, photon cannons, spines, etc. will die. If the building in the way has >500 hp, it subtracts 500 hp from the building and the rocks don't appear. - rocks falling on a geyser make it disappear. - rocks falling on units just make the units move out of the way. - even after the rock tower is knocked over, the initial spot that the rock tower was on remains unpathable (which seems really weird to me, because it LOOKS like you should be able to walk on it, as it's FLAT). - you can make them fall UP cliffs lol | ||
| ||
