Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 69

On July 26 2013 13:35 reps)squishy wrote:
I notice there are insane amount of 2 player maps few 4 player maps what about good ole 3 player maps like tau cross...

On July 28 2013 16:10 skdeimos wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Looking for some opinions on the layout before I do aesthetic work. Too open? Too many chokes? I was trying to make a contrast between very choke-heavy areas and very open areas, so that certain races are always trying to force fights at certain locations. Pretty new at this, so general tips would also be nice.

+ Show Spoiler +

Oh, and I'm planning to place collapsible rocks here for a Ravage-esque sort of way to deny bouncing between the ramps at the third. One problem, I can't figure out how to place them, because whenever I choose collapsible rock towers in the destructibles tab nothing shows up when I click. If someone could explain to me how to place those rock towers, that'd be awesome :D

On July 28 2013 16:35 HaRuHi wrote:


I see two problems,
The major one:
Mains are too small, terran will have a hard time building anything on this map.

The minor one:
Some of the patches in the natural seem to be siegable from the third, but not too sure.

On July 23 2013 07:07 And G wrote:

+ Show Spoiler +

I don't think I'll be making any more significant changes to the layout. It looks reasonably balanced to me now.

On July 28 2013 19:18 And G wrote:


Actually I thought about this some more, and I feel the main/nat/third layout makes more sense on a bigger map, so I made the center wider and added a few more bases:

+ Show Spoiler +

New playable size is 184x128. I think there is now a good mix of open spaces and chokes, and I'm also happier with the distances, especially nat2nat. There are no towers since I didn't feel they were necessary. Also, it is possible to wall off completely on the bottom of the ramp with two 3x3 buildings or with pylon+gateway+zealot. The narrow lanes along the edge of the map can be blocked with a 3x3 building at their diagonal sections, but not with a forcefield.

Comments?

On July 27 2013 09:21 Dellron wrote:
ok, thanks.
here is the updated version:

i moved third number one away from the gap, changed the middle path, increased the size of the main, and shrunk third number 2 and made it easier to move from it to the nat.

On July 29 2013 01:22 Dellron wrote:

i don't get it, is my map really that bad? no one has anything to say about it?

On July 29 2013 07:42 -NegativeZero- wrote:
skdeimos: Good layout overall, but the space between the natural and 3rd is too open - it'll be too hard for P to secure the 3rd vs Z. Either narrow this gap or add an obstacle in the middle of that area.

On July 29 2013 06:02 19Meavis93 wrote:


not really, theres just a lack of feedback per posts in this thread usualy.
as for your map, the natural choke looks wide, aswell as the rocks.
then theres the rush distance, I think the map is a little to small.
and the chokes in the middle are a little to small to ever engage a defensive position in lategame.

On July 29 2013 13:32 moskonia wrote:
@skedimos, the 3rds look pretty hard, and in that sense the map reminds a lot of Planet S, including the corner bases as well. The main difference between that map and your is the middle. The middle reminds a lot of Daybreak, although even only in the middle there are noticeable differences, although the core principle remains which is there are very strong choke points.

I think that Zerg will be pretty imbalanced here because of openness combined with the specific choke points, which makes me want to see one of the 3rd bases become easier while keeping the general form of the map the same. Either that or choke some areas a lot more.