Thats an idea, you could just take Daybreak and delete all the doodads and texturing and have that be the template that we'd have everyone use.

edit - But I am way off topic now lol sorry

edit again - So here is what Daybreak LE looks like when it is "blank" with no doodads and one mar sara texture.

+ Show Spoiler +

monitor

United States2409 Posts

February 02 2013 21:03 GMT

#782

On February 02 2013 12:17 TheFish7 wrote:
@monitor
In the second, ice world map, whats the reasoning behind the rocks near the main? Seems like a really good (or really annoying) proxy pylon spot. Is there going to be a 3rd base there?

I felt that the small attack path would be too powerful for early 2 or 3 base pushes. It is good for taking a fourth and opening the paths lategame, but early game it would make the rush distance too short and choked. Once Z takes a fourth, the path is good so zerg doesnt have to venture into the middle of the map.

Aircooled

United States79 Posts

February 03 2013 04:14 GMT

#783

One more here as I rushed my last map post. Any thoughts? Still will probably go with no towers but I like them here because they cover all the ramps but you can still go through the middle. 152x112

Fatam

1986 Posts

February 03 2013 05:48 GMT

#784

Texturing is cool. I think 56 degree instead of 90 degree overview would make it a little easier to read the map in this case, but w/e

I like how open it is. All the maps submitted lately, while not super chokey, have no open areas. None of the areas on those maps are bigger than 12 squares in diameter and none are narrower than 8 (other than the main ramp, of course). The reason this is bad: where you engage matters a lot less when you don't have any variety in openness. So good on you :-P

@ the base layout, I feel like the XNT makes 4 bases a little too easy to hold. You can just sit your deathball on the bridge, say directly horizontal from the geyser at the third, and be able to cover the entrance near your nat. If your unit at the XNT sees an army coming from the other direction you can just bounce down there to intercept it in time.

Here's an idea I had - if you move one of the rock towers to the ramp near the fourth, then you can create a choice. If someone is greedy and wants a full base instead of 2.75, then they can kill the rock tower to block that entrance, and expand all the way to the 4th for their 3rd. Whereas, without the option to block that entrance, probably no one will take that as a third ever and you have less options.

edit: also, if the corner ledges were above the 6m1hyg base but NOT above the 4th, then that would be another incentive for a player to take the risky far-away base as a third, instead of the closer one. Especially if it was ZvT and the Zerg scouted bio play.

Aircooled

United States79 Posts

February 03 2013 06:23 GMT

#785

Alright yea that was the concern I had with the towers I'm just going to go with none. I like the rock idea because I felt like the 3rd/4th rocks are kinda pointless anyway and I might as well leave it as a normal choke. I'll definetely move them to the ramp and I'll think about that ledge, sounds good to me though.

monitor

United States2409 Posts

February 06 2013 01:22 GMT

#786

Continuing this WIP! Gas provides an easier 7th gas for zerg and a nice gas income for terran. Not any use for Protoss.

Coppermantis

United States845 Posts

February 06 2013 01:54 GMT

#787

Here's a design that I've been working with. I'm not really satisfied with it, but I'd like to see what you guys think.

[image loading]

lorestarcraft

United States1049 Posts

February 06 2013 03:04 GMT

#788

On February 03 2013 13:14 Aircooled wrote:
One more here as I rushed my last map post. Any thoughts? Still will probably go with no towers but I like them here because they cover all the ramps but you can still go through the middle. 152x112

Man, those textures!! How do you do that??

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 06 2013 08:05 GMT

#789

Sort of a mix between Dual Site and Kulas Ravine I guess.

2more

Germany13 Posts

February 06 2013 22:34 GMT

#790

Hello everyone. I would like to know what you guys think about my first mapping attempt. Its a 128x128ish map Im sure, there are quite a few flaws, so I would like to have some feedback on how I could improve the map or on gameplay problems that may accure.

Also has somebody an idea on how I could make the ramps look less ugly? I have no idea how I could blend in the different textures any better way. Maybe there is a good trick.

Thank you for the feedback

more detailed view:

lorestarcraft

United States1049 Posts

February 06 2013 23:26 GMT

#791

@2more: Go through ALL the doodads and look at other community maps for texturing ideas and techniques. Also, you click a doodad and hit enter to bring up a menu to modify it in several ways. Tarmacs are good for ramps on space maps.

On your map in particular, it seems smaller than 128x128. It really is too small, which results in the tower covering too much ground. Play on a standard map like CK, then on your map, measure distances and stuff, and then see how it compares. Know some of these basic things will help a lot. Also, ramps facing up and down and left and right are called cardinal ramps. These ramps present problems with wall-off, and while they are fine on the sides there, probably not for the natural.

lorestarcraft

United States1049 Posts

February 06 2013 23:28 GMT

#792

On February 06 2013 17:05 SiskosGoatee wrote:

Sort of a mix between Dual Site and Kulas Ravine I guess.

I know we disagree on naturals, but aside from that I guess the only thing I don't care for is the little high ground in the middle, the map is a pretty chokey map by design but I think that middle thing is a little much. The base layout seems cool imo.

monitor

United States2409 Posts

February 06 2013 23:52 GMT

#793

On February 06 2013 17:05 SiskosGoatee wrote:

Sort of a mix between Dual Site and Kulas Ravine I guess.

Basic feedback I can give is that its oversaturated. I don't like 7 expos per player on a 2p map. 5 can work if they're well designed. 6, with 2 being half bases, is ideal for most designs. This map just has a shit ton of them and it detracts from gameplay. It detracts from map control. Closeness encourages turtling. It also plays very linearly.

Coppermantis

United States845 Posts

February 07 2013 04:49 GMT

#794

Non-aesthetic updates are pretty minor. Simply made the main easier to get in/out of for Reapers.

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 07 2013 05:33 GMT

#795

How large is that map anyway,copper?

Coppermantis

United States845 Posts

February 07 2013 05:50 GMT

#796

It's 156x159

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 07 2013 06:04 GMT

#797

@copper: I like it but it's just so big. Also, the 4th in your quarter is so much closer than the righthand 4th, and it's also sort of an automatic base that isn't any more vulnerable in terms of openness, push distance, high ground, or harassability. What if you shrink the map to about 146x146 and put the 4th base more in the middle where the tower has vision of the high ground. That will bring the "away from opponent" 4th much closer, make them more vulnerable by dint of proximity, and provide a better bridge to the other quarters of the map (especially CCW).

[image loading]

Coppermantis

United States845 Posts

February 07 2013 06:22 GMT

#798

@EatThePath: That's a good idea. I was concerned about the safeness of the fourth but wasn't sure about how to go about remedying it. I think that I'll try that out.

Hmm, after seeing the concept my interpretation was apparently more extreme, but I do like that image a lot since it requires less modification to the existing design. :v

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 07 2013 06:26 GMT

#799

On February 07 2013 15:22 Coppermantis wrote:
@EatThePath: That's a good idea. I was concerned about the safeness of the fourth but wasn't sure about how to go about remedying it. I think that I'll try that out.

Hmm, after seeing the concept my interpretation was apparently more extreme, but I do like that image a lot since it requires less modification to the existing design. :v

Yeah I was shooting for easy fix. I think you could mostly just copy paste some pieces without having to do any major cliff drawing. ^^

er, WAS** lol

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 07 2013 06:43 GMT

#800

On February 07 2013 07:34 2more wrote:
Hello everyone. I would like to know what you guys think about my first mapping attempt. Its a 128x128ish map Im sure, there are quite a few flaws, so I would like to have some feedback on how I could improve the map or on gameplay problems that may accure.

Also has somebody an idea on how I could make the ramps look less ugly? I have no idea how I could blend in the different textures any better way. Maybe there is a good trick.

Thank you for the feedback

more detailed view:

All in all it's not a bad concept. It doesn't have any glaring problems in proportions (chokes and openness) and the expansion progression is alright. It's a little on the small side (distances) and it has some circle syndrome (bases around the outside with equal distances between sides), but it sort of works with how you set up the middle. The tower is so dominating, it should be removed, you should have two separate towers that watch different paths, or you should enlarge the map so the tower doesn't cover every single route through the middle. :D

You should also get rid of the high ground bits near the tower, since a powerful area should be dangerous and open enough for lategame armies.

For aesthetics, lore had good tips. For the manmade type textures, it's difficult to blend them gradually. It's better to make intricate or tiled patterns. If you look at the map art thread you can find all kinds of examples of both natural and artificial terrain. Also, it's almost always better to use diagonal ramps, and that will help them look better with the diagonal textures. One good technique that almost everyone uses for ramps is to use some unobtrusive doodads to mark the corners and the edges, like "landing lights" or the various pillars. This doesn't cause too much distraction makes them visually distinct and is a surprisingly effective cue that helps players immensely.

Oh I forgot to say good work!