|
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin |
your Country52797 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PCgoM7b.jpg)
On August 04 2013 16:01 moskonia wrote:
Templar, Blink and reapers are too strong here, consider having some distance between the main and the area near it.
Two more issues which have the same way to fix them both is that the bottom bases will be rarely used and that the 3rd is really easy, which is especially bad since this is a very big map. The fix would be to make another entrance for the 3rd bases, one that connects it to the area behind it, and thus making the bottom bases a reasonable 4th bases while making the 3rd harder to take.
Other than that the top left area should be changed somewhat, it looks a bit cramped, the base above the main is fine, but the other expansions should be altered a bit imo. You need to remove either the 2 small expansions, or the one between them, all 3 is too much.
With all of these changes I think it will be a really interesting map, I really like reflected maps.
-3rd changes done
-Removed 2 expansions, replaced with a gold
On August 04 2013 16:19 -NegativeZero- wrote:Looks like you might be able to blink directly into the main without an obs from the high ground bases adjacent to them. Also the mains are definitely siegeable, geyser might even be able to be hit with range 6 units from the low ground. As for the map layout, I agree with everything moskonia said, plus I think the 3 bases at the top left are all so close to each other that they will never all be used except as winner's bases - especially since controlling the center base controls all ground access to the 2 bases behind it. The quick fix would be to remove the center base, but the better option would probably be to remove all 3 bases and replace them with a single base - maybe a high-resource gold?
-Blink issue fixed (I think? haven't tested yet)
-Haven't fixed or checked on main mineral line issue yet but will probably fix 
-Hmm is the top right I have right now slightly better?
Additional changes:
-Made middle slightly move interesting, requiring a side attack path.
-Made lower right ridge above the middle wider
-Removed ridges next to the third
-Removed vision-blocking doodads at the lower ridge
Planned changes:
-Fix the main mineral line
-Move the top left regular expansion somewhere else
-Slightly alter middle to be slightly easier to look at
On August 06 2013 22:58 TheFish7 wrote:Lots of us need to work on our mineral lines. Here are the standard layouts for reference; Show nested quote +On November 30 2012 09:12 iamcaustic wrote: Okay, so since everyone keeps messing up the basic, standard mineral placements, here you are: + Show Spoiler +This is as standard as you can get. Cardinal and 45 degree mineral lines, one geyser on either side. If you're a new mapmaker and aren't comfortable doing non-standard things like having 2 geysers on one side or unique resource placement, just use this image for reference and you should be good to go. Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 08:19 Gfire wrote:I guess it's important now to make sure that the workers don't get too messed up when auto-splitting in the mains. + Show Spoiler [side] ++ Show Spoiler [top] ++ Show Spoiler [corner] +Here I've shown some of the ones I tested. Some of them end up with workers going behind the minerals and some don't. I only tested formations which allowed for 3-worker geysers... I think any of these formations would be fine in a non-main position.
I do those first ones all the time T_T
|
your Country52797 Posts
also this map which is about 2 weeks old
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zmm3eyF.jpg)
size: 142x142
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Q7DRHEH.jpg)
So, I went through and scrapped most of what I had for my map (original a few posts back). Then I looked at a lot of the TPW maps and a few other forums for ideas/map making info. I haven't touched the textures yet after re-working the layout so please forgive that.
Map size is still 160x160 and is up to 4 spawns from the original 2.
|
MEzrezzed, ur map reminds me a lot of the Zerus map that was on the ladder for 1 season, and I don't think its good to be similar to that map. Anyways biggest problem I see is that the main ramp is really exposed, meaning that walling off will be a bit hard and weird, consider changing the nat layout a bit to make it easier to wall.
|
@moskonia: I assume the map you're referring to is Zerus Prime? If so, then I see what you mean. Would redoing the center so it wasn't such a choke that split the map in two be the best way of doing it, or are you implying that the entire layout should be reworked? I'm considering taking out the center bases and opening up the center more so the map isn't split as easily.
I'm fairly new to map making, so if you could be specific that would be appreciated.
|
|
|
@The_Templar. Bases fit. I have modified the forward high ground base so larger armies can fit there easier. Making it somewhat harder to take a third was by design, including the whole issue with the gold high ground. Players will have to make a significant choice of expanding either towards their gold side of the map or away from it. That choice, and the corresponding choice of the opponent will dictate attack paths, positioning and the dynamics of the game in ways that the map should play out in different ways. At least, that's what I'm going for with this map. Btw, star station has a harder to take third IMO and that map is fine. I tried going for a soft back door for the natural even, to give some an additional early offensive option and another harassment option later.
Good points, thanks for the feedback. Latest version below. Nudged the playable area to 154x116 to fix a camera issue. Also, main is now a bit less blinkable.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/e3OLET2.png)
|
@Dancecommand. Is the ground between the main and the .. fourth(?) pathable? I really like your ideas on this one, very interesting layout.
|
@Juggernaut. I think the map would be improved a lot if you just removed the bottom corner expansions altogether, including the land strip between them. I makes the map smaller and also a lot simpler (good). North bases seem extremely hard to hold, perhaps just replace them with one base since whoever holds one of them will have to control the area for the other? Also, the thin strip of ground in the center just below the middle high ground seems strange. I'd use that to make a bigger middle or something else. Did you intend something very specific with it? It seems workers should be able to transfer using alternative and even safer paths, and I can't see anything else it can be used for? I like the concept!
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tz9tHVc.jpg)
Opinions on slight layout changes and preliminary texturing?
|
@MEzrezzed. Tempting to make the middle north/south bases highground. However, on close by ground spawns units at those bases can already siege the mineral line of the low ground third/fourth (entombed became cross or north/south spawns only for reasons less than this). With nats in each corner, rush distances nat-nat for cross spawns look very high. Also, close by ground is crazy close by air and this may be a problem (also due to mains not in corners). I really like your idea with a high ground ledge and those rocks for the EW bases. Will you use a xelnaga?
|
@Meltage. The middle seems pretty restricted, forcing attacks away from the center area (maybe causing a slight circle syndrome even?). I feel, big mid-late game armies may have a hard time to maneuver. Have you considered rocks in the middle area that opens up a more direct attack path and allows for both defensive and offensive army positioning? I'm not crazy about the xelnaga placements either. They seem to suffer a bit from the same issue. An alternative could be to place them further east and west, if you want to commit to the current center area design. Even if you change the center to have rocks that can be openened, that direct path will then not be covered by the xelnaga. That low ground third is awesome! Well done. 
|
@skdeimos. None other than that I find no glaring layout issues, I think. Layout looks really cool About texturing, you may want to blend textures? It give my eyes that pastel color feeling.
|
On August 07 2013 08:50 LoveTool wrote:
@Dancecommand. Is the ground between the main and the .. fourth(?) pathable? I really like your ideas on this one, very interesting layout.
The sliver of rock that starts behind the nat and goes between the main and fourth? Yeah it is! Everyone keeps crying that siege tanks are useless and reapers are borderline so I decided that I'd try something that I haven't really seen in any map before. There are also LOS blockers on the low ground between the main and 4th. I'm thinking blink might be an issue on this map, even tho there isn't that much space to abuse.
|
@skdeimos: Looking at the base layout atm the first four remind me a lot of Planet S, with the exception that the 9 and 3 o'clock bases seem kinda tough with that high ground there. Are you set on keeping that? To me it feels kinda ... out of place. I'd like to see what the map would look like if you moved the corner 4ths closer to 12 and 6 o'clock repectively and then squeeze the main-nat-third line like one or two 3x3 grids higher and lower respectively. I like the texturing you've got going on but maybe switch the grassy bits with the desert bits? Seems conceptually confusing to have sandy dunes above a grass land.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FzciEdO.jpg)
Thanks for the feedback.
I've reworked the center and removed the N/S bases that were initially there to allow for more movement. I've also redone the mineral line for the 3rd to open up the map more. The nat's have been moved in closer, but I think they could still use some more work. Thinking of moving the nat/mains in the direction of the arrows to increase the flight distance between mains as well, though that might not be enough.
@LoveTool: As for xel'naga towers, I'm considering them, and I've marked out three possible location/pairs on the map. I'm leaning toward the locations marked with 1, though that would mean widening that path in the center to the N/S points. That may cause some issues with siege on the high ground.
Any feedback is appreciated.
|
MEz. Cool changes. A fourth option would be to only have one xelnaga, in the center. If not that, I think I would favor the 1 option, since close by ground spawns may even with the changes still present problems for a defending player. Perhaps there is even a fifth option, to combine the 2 option with an additional two xelnagas, somewhere close to the east/west wings of the map.
|
On August 06 2013 23:25 The_Templar wrote:also this map which is about 2 weeks old + Show Spoiler +size: 142x142
Main is too big, 3rd is too open. Fix that and you've got a map!
On August 07 2013 00:01 MEzrezzed wrote:+ Show Spoiler +So, I went through and scrapped most of what I had for my map (original a few posts back). Then I looked at a lot of the TPW maps and a few other forums for ideas/map making info. I haven't touched the textures yet after re-working the layout so please forgive that. Map size is still 160x160 and is up to 4 spawns from the original 2.
The 3rd bases are really close to each other and far from the natural. I would reduce the size of the main a little to tuck them closer and try to create some sort of intervening terrain so it's not a straight push.
Oh I see the new version now. That's a bit better.
I am confusing you with mereel for this map. It's cool, but the bases are kinda sparse. Also can workers get through those rocks? Otherwise how is zerg supposed to take a 3rd?
On August 07 2013 08:10 LoveTool wrote:@The_Templar. Bases fit. I have modified the forward high ground base so larger armies can fit there easier. Making it somewhat harder to take a third was by design, including the whole issue with the gold high ground. Players will have to make a significant choice of expanding either towards their gold side of the map or away from it. That choice, and the corresponding choice of the opponent will dictate attack paths, positioning and the dynamics of the game in ways that the map should play out in different ways. At least, that's what I'm going for with this map. Btw, star station has a harder to take third IMO and that map is fine. I tried going for a soft back door for the natural even, to give some an additional early offensive option and another harassment option later. Good points, thanks for the feedback. Latest version below. Nudged the playable area to 154x116 to fix a camera issue. Also, main is now a bit less blinkable. + Show Spoiler +
What is the purpose of the 2nd entrance to the natural? I think you should scrap it, move the natural over, and extend/move the main into the corner because it needs more space. If you want to keep harass option you could put some of the minerals close to the cliff of the natural.
I really like how the center/forward 3rd you have is not too far towards the opponent, but I would still change the ramps I think so they aren't so forward facing.
Pretty interesting.
@skdeimos looks good
|
On August 07 2013 19:16 DanceCommand wrote:
@skdeimos: Looking at the base layout atm the first four remind me a lot of Planet S, with the exception that the 9 and 3 o'clock bases seem kinda tough with that high ground there. Are you set on keeping that? To me it feels kinda ... out of place. I'd like to see what the map would look like if you moved the corner 4ths closer to 12 and 6 o'clock repectively and then squeeze the main-nat-third line like one or two 3x3 grids higher and lower respectively. I like the texturing you've got going on but maybe switch the grassy bits with the desert bits? Seems conceptually confusing to have sandy dunes above a grass land.
I've been thinking a lot about moving the corner bases closer to 12 and 6 o clock actually, by enlarging the lowground path connecting it to the third. I'm currently experimenting with some layout changes in the top left/lower right corners.
As for the 9 and 3 o clock bases, you only think they're an issue because you're thinking of this map as having a Planet S-esque expansion pattern. Those bases are intended to be lategame bases along the map's split line, like the 12 and 6 bases on Daybreak. You're right that those high grounds would be an excellent staging point for attacks on that base, especially in midgame PvX, but that's intended because it makes it a more interesting lategame base.
Oh, and I figured out how to add collapsible rocks! Actually no I didn't, I just opened Akilon Wastes and copied them because I couldn't figure out how to place them normally. Anyways, the third base is really interesting now because of them. Very reminiscent of Ravage, and I fucking love the third base on Ravage.
|
@EatThePath. Yes, the "soft" natural back door is intended as a harass option or alternative early pressure point (ZvZ). It is an experimental idea that I like better than just exposing the nat mineral line to fire as it allows units to actually enter the natural, and potentially the main.
@All: Current version below, changes include
- Main is now larger. Blink/reaper ramp has been moved accordingly to make space.
- Natural is now somewhat larger and the ramp from nat to map central lowground has been moved 1 hex out to make more room.
- Forward high ground alternative third/fourth has been changed to low gound to make this area less powerful when used offensively. Xelnaga now corespondingly a mini-high ground.
- Central area widened to make it less chokey for a passing army (FF nerf).
- Defensive part of high ground above gold base has been removed and both ramp rocks are now on the side of the offensive player. This is a nerf of this area when used as an attacker's staging ground by making defensive army movements easier.
- NW/SE corner bases have been increased in size and moved more into the middle of the map. This is an effort to make them more exposed for an attacker and consequently make the low ground third more protected, comparatively.
- Lakes in the same area have been changed, mostly reduced in size to make this area somewhat less chokey. These changed have been made with defensibility of the low ground third taken into account. It is still a somewhat hard third to take for protoss, but there are some defensive advantages.
- Minerals and gasses have been cleaned up at all bases.
- Various additional minor changes, retexturing of modified areas, aestetics, etc.
Also, rush distance nat choke to nat choke is about 43 seconds w/ the central rocks up (Akilon ~40, Whirlwind cross ~49). With the rocks down it is about 41 s.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AwHPEUY.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WCHuoxb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/egBvg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LhAw4Zq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5OJWLUG.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZCPkRjy.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XvY4WZS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MrcUCCM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MZNYKbe.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1FvwFp6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oIOMPug.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bmT5zQN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/r0PLj9C.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5uPpngG.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PKDBkk7.jpg)
