If by "natural cliff less exposed" you're implying that the natural cliff is currently droppable, then that certainly should NOT be the case. Aside from that, the entire natural should just be smaller overall - just matching the creep spread from 1 hatch should produce a good size. The ramp size (3FF) is fine, no need to change that.

maltenp

Sweden15 Posts

February 03 2014 22:30 GMT

#1962

Very far from finished with the aesthetic but here is the concept anyway.

Concept view:

(Bear with me, did the textures etc. in less than an hour..)

High res overview:

+ Show Spoiler +

Map Analyser:

+ Show Spoiler +

Let me know what you think about the layout, concept and especially balance issues.

Thanks!

algue

France1436 Posts

February 04 2014 07:20 GMT

#1963

@maltenp : looks good but the rush distance looks so short compared to any other path that I doubt anybody will move around the entire map.

Yonnua

United Kingdom2331 Posts

February 04 2014 13:20 GMT

#1964

@Maltenp Maybe have a couple set of destructible debris diagonally across the centre so that people can't go through there early game?

ConCentrate405

Brazil71 Posts

February 05 2014 20:37 GMT

#1965

I'm working on an revamped version of metalopolis, the idea is to make it in a burning theme, plus a few changes in layout, cliffs and wathever to make it more suitable for HOTS. It's an obvious map to remake so I'm sorry if there is too many already.
2 spawning positions only (old cross). No Watchtowers.
[image loading]

The natural is on higher ground than the original to create a ramp and make it safer from main pathway, but the its relation to the third remains, a huge ramp to high ground.

+ Show Spoiler +

There's no close by air positions. Instead that base "was destroyed", including the original ramp. Now it has a side ramp that conects to the center bases (no golds). Also the center bases has only 2 ramps now.
+ Show Spoiler +

My main concern is the central bases. Not expecting anyone to take them unless is really necessary so should I scrap them and just make an open field? Or leave some terrain/doddads to make some chokes?
Any suggestions in general?
Its missing some geysers..oops...

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

February 09 2014 02:58 GMT

#1966

On February 06 2014 05:37 ConCentrate405 wrote:
I'm working on an revamped version of metalopolis, the idea is to make it in a burning theme, plus a few changes in layout, cliffs and wathever to make it more suitable for HOTS. It's an obvious map to remake so I'm sorry if there is too many already.
2 spawning positions only (old cross). No Watchtowers.
[image loading]

The natural is on higher ground than the original to create a ramp and make it safer from main pathway, but the its relation to the third remains, a huge ramp to high ground.

+ Show Spoiler +

Maybe put collapsible rocks on at least one of the ramps? Or maybe on both, so a player can make islands? It would be a cool mechanic when you take both towers.

Maybe you could stick a single rich geyser in each of the two middle bases?

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

February 09 2014 03:45 GMT

#1967

Here's a rough idea of Isolo (144 x 144)

Notable Features:

Third can be backdoored
Units can walk between the pairs of rocks in the center (and can be seen by tower as they do)
Initially a long rush distance due to the roundabout path units have to take, shortened after rocks go down
Gold bases w/ 6 patches
Bases at 9 and 3 have two rich geysers but are very vulnerable from attacks on the right ramp and from the main
Watch tower in the center is walled off by two mineral patches with 25 mins each
Very open center

-NegativeZero-

United States2141 Posts

February 10 2014 00:43 GMT

#1968

@Sentinel: Overall I think the map will be too splitty in the late game, since controlling the high grounds on either side allow you to easily move to defend ground attacks against any of the bases on your side. Also the natural and 3rd backdoor entrances are too narrow, 3rds are probably too tight, and the mains are too large. I think a good place to start would be shrinking the mains into the corners and moving the naturals towards the mains - this will help spread the bases out and make more room for them in general.

Here's something I made. I don't like ubermacroturtlealterzim games so the map is fairly low resource, with 10 spread out bases, and I'm madly in love with high ground pods so there's 4 of them. Also the main/nat/3rd being in a nearly straight line should make defending against mutas, and other air in general, a little easier. Other than that, standard map is standard.

Also I know warp-ins over the wall blocking the main are currently possible, but I'll definitely add doodads and pathing blocked areas to prevent that in more complete versions.

Angled
+ Show Spoiler +

Analyzer
+ Show Spoiler +

skdeimos

Canada155 Posts

February 10 2014 00:55 GMT

#1969

@NegZero: That's beautiful. I looooove high ground pods. Maybe a bit too chokey though?

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 10 2014 00:56 GMT

#1970

@neg That looks really fun. I love the high ground between the 3rd and 4th, it's like a perfect instance of that sort of map feature.

-NegativeZero-

United States2141 Posts

February 10 2014 01:07 GMT

#1971

On February 10 2014 09:55 skdeimos wrote:
@NegZero: That's beautiful. I looooove high ground pods. Maybe a bit too chokey though?

Thanks, any suggestions on areas to open up?

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

February 10 2014 01:20 GMT

#1972

I do like three elevation levels over two.

I wouldn't say it's more chokey per se, it's actually more open-looking than Heavy Rain.

Are you going to leave that rock pillar in front of the natural exposed? It would be a cool mechanic for colossus/stalker/tank/drop positioning.

Meavis

Netherlands1300 Posts

February 11 2014 19:56 GMT

#1973

concept im working on

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

February 11 2014 20:01 GMT

#1974

Not enough outer bases currently imo, seems like a lot of 6 base turtling

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 12 2014 02:17 GMT

#1975

Cross spawns only? Is this better than Metropolis? I think so... maybe. If it's cross spawns, lose the 12/6 oclock bases and put some bases on the east/west highgrounds, and make the map a little narrower? Or pinch in the mains/nats.

-NegativeZero-

United States2141 Posts

February 14 2014 05:19 GMT

#1976

I've been spamming out a lot of WIPs lately, here's my 4th unfinished layout.

I'm not sure if this type of main choke has been tried before, but I can't recall any maps in particular which have used it. The widest part of the choke nearest the main can be walled with the standard 2 depots + rax, or gate+core with a 1 unit gap, and each of the smaller chokes it splits into can be blocked with 1 FF.

Also the map is quite small at 132x132, and the forward natural placement leads to an extremely short rush distance of 92.3 tiles (32.8 seconds with a worker). Players could theoretically choose to take the 3rd as the natural to avoid this, although at the cost of the farther distance. This is definitely an early game focused map, although still with the possibility for matches to go well into the late game with the presence of 6 spread out bases per player - the longer the game goes the more standard it should get.

Suggestions are appreciated, pls tell me what's broken. The map is based very loosely on this very old BW map, although it's so heavily edited it's definitely a new map by now, lol.

Angled
+ Show Spoiler +

Analyzer
+ Show Spoiler +

greenroom

United States20 Posts

February 14 2014 21:27 GMT

#1977

@Meavis - I really like that layout! I do agree with everyone else though, it looks too top-vs-bottomy.

@Negative - Very cool layout of the first 3 bases. I really like the y-path from the main into the natural and 3rd.

It seems like this might be a tough map for zerg to me. I can just imagine siege tanks hitting the natural from the other side of the wall, or a few sentries sneaking in through the back door and ffing the main entrance. I'm no expert though. Very cool.

Syphon8

Canada298 Posts

February 17 2014 21:45 GMT

#1978

"Pocket nat or open nat?"

"WHY NOT BOTH?"

TheFish7

United States2824 Posts

February 17 2014 22:33 GMT

#1979

lol well played, Syphon8, I like it, but the middle is kinda tight with every early attack route flowing through it

iamcaustic

Canada1509 Posts

February 18 2014 09:02 GMT

#1980

On February 18 2014 06:45 Syphon8 wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

"Pocket nat or open nat?"

"WHY NOT BOTH?"

Oh God... the Reaper and Blink abuse with that main... not to mention the sickest siege tank positioning to deny the main ramp ever. I think it's a flunk for TvT and TvP unfortunately.

Would have to scale down the shenanigans to avoid the auto losses.