|
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin |
On May 31 2013 03:50 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2013 03:35 Dellron wrote:On May 31 2013 02:12 The_Templar wrote:On May 31 2013 01:57 Dellron wrote:On May 30 2013 08:32 algue wrote:On May 30 2013 03:28 Dellron wrote:Ok guys, here is the update to my low ground main map: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0RVwRml.jpg) i made the forward natural a little easier to defend and made the map a little smaller. distances are: 73 seconds for cross spawn. 69 for horizontal. (note, these are from town hall to town hall.) you should rotate your map by 45 degree. Vertical and horizontal ramps have to be used with parsimony how do i rotate the map by 45 degree's, and you'd pretty much have to remake the map actually whats wrong with having lots of vertical/horizontal ramps. hard to wall and they often look awkward. the ramps are all pretty big so i didn't you would want to wall much anyways. the only place that you would really want to wall would be the natural, and the primary entrance to that isn't a ramp. i don't really think it looks awkward, but i look at maps differently than most, and i like to do things different. hmm, didn't look at your map the first time, just answered your question. now that I've actually looked, my opinions: -not a fan of low ground main + in-base natural but it could work I suppose -you could connect the thirds between bottom/top bases with high ground and have a single set of rocks -the low ground fourths are really close together (all of them), maybe change into one base or separate them more? -change the one ramp into low ground fourths (3 and 9 o'clock) into two diagonal ramps so the base is easier to access by both parties. -make 6 and 12 bases slightly larger so battles can occur there I'm not a very good mapmaker so take my advice with a grain of salt.
ok, thanks so much for the help. i really wanted to try a low ground main map, and i thought having a choice between naturals would be cool. you either take the inbase nat but leave your main vulnerable, or the forward nat that has a backdoor.
also: i forgot to mention that vertical spawn will be disabled, so let me know if that changes anything or if you think i shouldn't disable it.
|
On May 31 2013 11:53 Dellron wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2013 03:50 The_Templar wrote:On May 31 2013 03:35 Dellron wrote:On May 31 2013 02:12 The_Templar wrote:On May 31 2013 01:57 Dellron wrote:On May 30 2013 08:32 algue wrote:On May 30 2013 03:28 Dellron wrote:Ok guys, here is the update to my low ground main map: i made the forward natural a little easier to defend and made the map a little smaller. distances are: 73 seconds for cross spawn. 69 for horizontal. (note, these are from town hall to town hall.) you should rotate your map by 45 degree. Vertical and horizontal ramps have to be used with parsimony how do i rotate the map by 45 degree's, and you'd pretty much have to remake the map actually whats wrong with having lots of vertical/horizontal ramps. hard to wall and they often look awkward. the ramps are all pretty big so i didn't you would want to wall much anyways. the only place that you would really want to wall would be the natural, and the primary entrance to that isn't a ramp. i don't really think it looks awkward, but i look at maps differently than most, and i like to do things different. hmm, didn't look at your map the first time, just answered your question. now that I've actually looked, my opinions: -not a fan of low ground main + in-base natural but it could work I suppose -you could connect the thirds between bottom/top bases with high ground and have a single set of rocks -the low ground fourths are really close together (all of them), maybe change into one base or separate them more? -change the one ramp into low ground fourths (3 and 9 o'clock) into two diagonal ramps so the base is easier to access by both parties. -make 6 and 12 bases slightly larger so battles can occur there I'm not a very good mapmaker so take my advice with a grain of salt. ok, thanks so much for the help. i really wanted to try a low ground main map, and i thought having a choice between naturals would be cool. you either take the inbase nat but leave your main vulnerable, or the forward nat that has a backdoor. also: i forgot to mention that vertical spawn will be disabled, so let me know if that changes anything or if you think i shouldn't disable it.
Are you sure you wanna keep the huge vertical ramp next to the main ? It encourages people to cheese/ all in.
|
On May 31 2013 21:27 algue wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2013 11:53 Dellron wrote:On May 31 2013 03:50 The_Templar wrote:On May 31 2013 03:35 Dellron wrote:On May 31 2013 02:12 The_Templar wrote:On May 31 2013 01:57 Dellron wrote:On May 30 2013 08:32 algue wrote:On May 30 2013 03:28 Dellron wrote:Ok guys, here is the update to my low ground main map: i made the forward natural a little easier to defend and made the map a little smaller. distances are: 73 seconds for cross spawn. 69 for horizontal. (note, these are from town hall to town hall.) you should rotate your map by 45 degree. Vertical and horizontal ramps have to be used with parsimony how do i rotate the map by 45 degree's, and you'd pretty much have to remake the map actually whats wrong with having lots of vertical/horizontal ramps. hard to wall and they often look awkward. the ramps are all pretty big so i didn't you would want to wall much anyways. the only place that you would really want to wall would be the natural, and the primary entrance to that isn't a ramp. i don't really think it looks awkward, but i look at maps differently than most, and i like to do things different. hmm, didn't look at your map the first time, just answered your question. now that I've actually looked, my opinions: -not a fan of low ground main + in-base natural but it could work I suppose -you could connect the thirds between bottom/top bases with high ground and have a single set of rocks -the low ground fourths are really close together (all of them), maybe change into one base or separate them more? -change the one ramp into low ground fourths (3 and 9 o'clock) into two diagonal ramps so the base is easier to access by both parties. -make 6 and 12 bases slightly larger so battles can occur there I'm not a very good mapmaker so take my advice with a grain of salt. ok, thanks so much for the help. i really wanted to try a low ground main map, and i thought having a choice between naturals would be cool. you either take the inbase nat but leave your main vulnerable, or the forward nat that has a backdoor. also: i forgot to mention that vertical spawn will be disabled, so let me know if that changes anything or if you think i shouldn't disable it. Are you sure you wanna keep the huge vertical ramp next to the main ? It encourages people to cheese/ all in.
you mean the main's entrance ramp? yeah, i want to keep it, the rush distances are a little long, plus its pretty easy to wall in the entrance to the forward natural.
|
|
|
your Country52798 Posts
Very interesting backdoors; I assume the center bases are supposed to be the fifth bases?
I would replace the rock tower in the natural with just rocks so that it's possible to early expand safely, right now it's too exposed.
|
On June 01 2013 09:43 The_Templar wrote:
Very interesting backdoors; I assume the center bases are supposed to be the fifth bases?
I would replace the rock tower in the natural with just rocks so that it's possible to early expand safely, right now it's too exposed.
It is exposed on purpose. I am experimenting here with a more open natural. I thought about placement carefully. I think early expanding is possible with the proper simcity. It is designed to be marginally harder just to see what that is like.
|
here is version 3 of my map, i made heavy changes to fourths, as well as a couple other changes.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lTy1xy2.jpg)
also here is the description from my first post, in case you didn't see it:
its a 4 spawn, 1v1 map, vertical spawn will be disabled. i wanted to try low ground mains, not many people do them and i think if you do it right its still balanced. there is a choice between where to expand, i like the idea of having 2 possible naturals, and this one there is a big choice on where to expand first. the expansion path will heavily change depending on the spawn locations and the matchups.
so, i would like to hear what you guys think about the layout, before i go and texture it.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qJmTTdr.jpg)
Liar\'s Bluff
152x164
EDIT: I should mention that the lowground basins next to the mains are indeed pathable, allowing for Reaper and Blink Stalker harassment.
|
![[image loading]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-eyb0gb9Jrj8/Uav-TnThTlI/AAAAAAAABi0/3DF7lZ0ni-Q/s720/nyky.jpg)
If you want to wall the natural the gasses become part of the wall so they can be easily harassed and sniped.
|
Map: Sprint
Wanted to share this. The purpose of the map is specifically to test the bridges. They are set-up to retract/extend every 30 seconds in offset paired timings (north/south pairs -- not the mirror bridge). Because the bridges are the focal point of the map, currently I am not planning on doing too much with terrain. It's just meant to be a decent map to support the bridge concept. Anyway -- here is where it is sitting right now -- hopefully I can have it up soon for testing. If units fall through the bridges they will be destroyed (although this may be fixed to teleport units that fall through back to a player's main base either in a timed reinforcement or just as they fall through), so you have a reason to get your units on and OFF the bridges. Hence the map name: Sprint. It is difficult to see but the middle is broken up by doodads.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZaHJVnt.jpg)
|
On June 04 2013 15:34 Coppermantis wrote:Liar\'s Bluff 152x164 EDIT: I should mention that the lowground basins next to the mains are indeed pathable, allowing for Reaper and Blink Stalker harassment.
so much dead space, and a large map with just 5 bases?
|
On June 05 2013 04:28 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2013 15:34 Coppermantis wrote:Liar\'s Bluff 152x164 EDIT: I should mention that the lowground basins next to the mains are indeed pathable, allowing for Reaper and Blink Stalker harassment. so much dead space, and a large map with just 5 bases?
Yep.
|
|
|
|
|
Wall-off
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7Yn2tMA.jpg)
Bounds:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NkyvgEn.jpg)
I might add another base in the 4:30/10:30 positions to remove some dead space and add an easier base but I like the highground and ramps in the middle, so I'm keeping them.
|
Try to figure out where you would place your army when you took all the bases on your side. If you'd take the 5th one, you would want to place your army on the high ground or very close to it, to be able to defend both. If both players want to have that spot, things get spicy.
Four 3x3 buildings are too much to wall of imo. It makes FEing very hard for T and P especially, since attackers at the wall can't be repelled with the Nexus cannon.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VcjNnFV.jpg)
Playable bounds 142x144
No name yet.
What I was doing here is making a map with hard bases and a layout that makes strong positioning important.
A thing I hope someone can help me with is making the 4th a choice, because right now taking the base behind the nat is pretty awkward I think. I doubt I can do it without altering the natual setup which I prefer not to, so if anyone can think of a way I would love to hear.
Also, is the 4th too hard? If its a bit hard I'm OK with it, but there is quite the distance between the 3rd and the 4th.
|
On June 04 2013 17:39 SiskosGoatee wrote:If you want to wall the natural the gasses become part of the wall so they can be easily harassed and sniped.
This is very cool. I like the area outside of the nat and the geysers as part of the wall. Denying gas at the natural is a very nice way for light pressure to pay off. Could you show a close up with the build grid enabled of the natural choke? I see you've embraced ambiguous expansions and all that increasing tension and such. What do you hope to accomplish with the few gold patches in the middle bases? Don't you have enough workers to transfer for a full saturation when you're taking a fourth? Perhaps occasionally not as zerg, so it could be a slight buff to 80 worker play. It makes sense for the island bases, since you won't be able to get many workers on to them, but it will help with the immediate returns. Thank you for not blocking them with rocks and instead making the mineral lines harassable.
Do you see anybody taking the base above the natural (in the lower left) as a third? Why? The best I can come up with is because it enables a fourth that is farther away from your opponent than the middle base, since it seems only barely easier to hold for a player with an air presence or tanks or colossi.
EDIT: welcome back
|
On June 06 2013 16:43 RFDaemoniac wrote:
What do you hope to accomplish with the few gold patches in the middle bases? Don't you have enough workers to transfer for a full saturation when you're taking a fourth? Perhaps occasionally not as zerg, so it could be a slight buff to 80 worker play. Well, you can take it as third aggresive base, it requires less workers to saturate and still gives you a decent income and it lies forward so if you want to stage a barade push it's a good option for a third. It's basically to provide incentive to expand forward so more tension and aggression occurs.
Thank you for not blocking them with rocks and instead making the mineral lines harassable. I did it in another map, I actually like this more than rock blocking, rock blocking tends to lead to them only being taken in the absolute lategame. With this system you can take them more easily but they are not as unvulnerable and in certain ways even more vulnerable.
Do you see anybody taking the base above the natural (in the lower left) as a third? Why? The best I can come up with is because it enables a fourth that is farther away from your opponent than the middle base, since it seems only barely easier to hold for a player with an air presence or tanks or colossi. I think the third would be very hard for Z to hold in a lot of cases if it was only the other one. T getting a good position with tanks hitting the lower mienral line. The other fourth is easier to take for Z.
|
On June 06 2013 07:08 Coppermantis wrote:
I might add another base in the 4:30/10:30 positions to remove some dead space and add an easier base but I like the highground and ramps in the middle, so I'm keeping them.
What about this :
+ Show Spoiler +
With these changes the space between the natural and the third would actually be useful. You could place rocks if you don't want the ennemy to get an cheap way to harass in the mid game
Edit : I somehow didn't see that you didn't add a ramp to access the gap between the natural and the third, you should add one imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EkqbRxV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XX2HGse.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1QTjjNj.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uWXQ2NO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PkZ0qc4.jpg)
