EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XNKK8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ucncx.jpg)
Playable : 156x156
Available on EU and NA
+ Show Spoiler [Aesthetics] +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/v1mjB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JGE34.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dS12h.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EDkBz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YAS9C.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HNZyC.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8XIAA.jpg)
[M](2) DF Black Thorns
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
fenX
France127 Posts
Playable : 156x156 Available on EU and NA + Show Spoiler [Aesthetics] + | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
The actual pathable areas are bit bland, which I actually dont mind at all for tourney maps, but maybe you could spice them up with a one or two more textures or some cracks or something | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
The aesthetics are absolutely stunning, but how about adding a couple of pics to show the main, nat, 3rd, etc, so we have a better understanding of how the map would work. Overall the map looks really cool, would love to give it a try with some friends and get back to you with in-game feedback  | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
Would be nice to have a little more info on the map, such as nat-to-nat rush distance, picture of the xel'naga tower (since it's not really clear where that is from the overview cuz it's dark.. one would assume it's in the middle), # of bases (even though someone can just count them.. it's nice not to have to). | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
I wish there was a decent map split, but there are enough bases for it to be okay well into the game. But after going vertical (most likely expansion pattern) the next bases require you to either take over your opponent's side of the map, or expand right next to his latest mining bases. Not sure if this can be fixed easily. Beautiful to look at though, huge admiration. | ||
|
OxyGenesis
United Kingdom281 Posts
My main worry gameplay-wise is siege tanks hitting the half base 3rd from the low ground. If they can only hit half of the mineral line I don't think it's too bad but if they can hit the hatchery I think that will be very annoying to deal with. Also elevator play into the main will be frustrating to deal with as well as it's a long way from the main ramp to the low ground outside the main. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12023 Posts
| ||
|
fenX
France127 Posts
On September 19 2012 11:58 Fatam wrote: Would be nice to have a little more info on the map, such as nat-to-nat rush distance, picture of the xel'naga tower (since it's not really clear where that is from the overview cuz it's dark.. one would assume it's in the middle), # of bases (even though someone can just count them.. it's nice not to have to). - I don't have the actual distance since the map analyzer doesn't work anymore. I'll try to time it, but distance is quite long, the map is big and pathing takes some detours - There is no watch tower, there are a lot of control points where you have to place overlords/observers/pylons/patrolling units to gain map control, not especially in the center. Those control points evolve with your expansion pattern, you can choose to expand on different locations and in different orders, so there was no obvious location for a watchtower and i didn't think it was necessary. Plus I don't like maps with one center watchtower (like on Antiga, the middle position is already too strong, with a watchtower it's op). Watchtowers are killing e-sport. - 12 full bases + 2 half bases. On September 19 2012 11:53 moskonia wrote: The aesthetics are absolutely stunning, but how about adding a couple of pics to show the main, nat, 3rd, etc, so we have a better understanding of how the map would work. Click on the overview and zoom in, I put a very big picture here (2048x1917) so you can see every part of the map as you wish. That's why I posted closer shots only for aesthetics. On September 19 2012 20:21 OxyGenesis wrote: This map looks awesome! I'm going to check out the aesthetics in game when I get a chance because they are super cool. Is it done with red fog and then tree doodads with a 0 HDR setting? It's a really cool effect, especially where you've used it coupled with the red fog and crystal doodads. My main worry gameplay-wise is siege tanks hitting the half base 3rd from the low ground. If they can only hit half of the mineral line I don't think it's too bad but if they can hit the hatchery I think that will be very annoying to deal with. Also elevator play into the main will be frustrating to deal with as well as it's a long way from the main ramp to the low ground outside the main. - Red fog with 2 HDR, Monlyth and Tarsonis trees with 1R0G0B color (doesn't work with 000, probably work with 0 HDR too). - Well the half 3rd wasn't part of the map design in the begining, I added it based on ArticRaven's idea. I didn't really like it at first, but after a few test games it seemed to help connecting the full 3rd with creep and act as a buffer to prevent pushes to cut between nat and full 3rd too easily. LoSB on the lowground helps flanking a lowground siege too, and even if you loose it it's only a half base so you can sacrifice it without loosing too much economy. Also it helps connecting with the expansion bellow the main, wich is not an obvious choice at first sight but can help protect the main against drops and control the ramp leading to the middle. About the drop/elevator/warpin vulnerability in the main it's the reason why you can choose to expand at the below-main base as 3rd or 4th and position your army there instead of expanding at the more obvious 3rd next to the nat. I wanted the expansion pattern to change depending on the matchup, that can make the map very technical and difficult to learn, but increase its lifespan if it's ever used at high level and doesn't prove to be too imbalanced (wich we couldn't test enough without very high level players). I make maps according to my beliefs, and I believe "strategy" is one of the words in "RTS", so I want to give players more options to choose their strategy not only about build orders but also where they expand and where they position their scouts and army. | ||
|
MrF
United States320 Posts
| ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
Even though I only played vs the AI I can say some stuff that you might want to think about: -The nat entrance is really small, 2 3x3 buildings + zealot can block it, meaning that you are pretty much safe vs early pools as toss. I don't know if that is good or bad but it is something to consider. -The first 4.5 bases are pretty easy, as standard, but the other 2 bases are really weird, the base that is close to the main can't really replace any other base since it is so far, and when each player has 4.5 bases already it is to contested to be taken by each side imo. What I think will happen is players would take the middle bases closer to their last expansion and then the last base for each side will be rarely used. I think you should change it a bit to make the middle bases the ones who are contested, doing that by making the base by the main to be closer to the half base, thus making it a viable alternative to the normal 3rd (even though ti should still be further away to encourage normal expand pattern. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
- I don't have the actual distance since the map analyzer doesn't work anymore. I'll try to time it, but distance is quite long, the map is big and pathing takes some detours You can measure it with the ctrl+m tool; works really well. Certain terrain features mess it up, such as ramps, but you can measure to the ramp, click to stop the measurement, then start your next measure right where you left off and just add the lengths up (it's how I've been getting my distances since they added it in 1.5). Click on the overview and zoom in, I put a very big picture here (2048x1917) so you can see every part of the map as you wish. That's why I posted closer shots only for aesthetics. I did (give me a little credit :-P), but it was still hard to see whether certain parts had a XNT hidden in it or not (map is pretty dark in certain areas). Anyhow, I think no XNT is fine. I do think XNTs are great for SC2 (so I'm going to disagree with your "i hate XNTs" sentiment) so long as they don't cover too much important ground (e.g. a map where the XNT(s) cover all the attack paths is dumb.. those are the kind of maps where the XNTs seem to ruin the game and make it turtley, but that's not the XNT's fault, that's the mapmaker's fault. (i.e. "guns don't kill people ..", lol)). Having a point of power worth fighting for that isn't resource-related is good and spices the game up. + Show Spoiler + I even think in the future, some kind of healing pool (like the ones in WC3) would be an interesting addition to the game, if the healing-per-second was pretty low and not OP. An energy one might be cool as well. edit: Reading my comment I didn't really talk about the actual map much, which is the point of these threads. I think it's strong. Even though it's a fairly standard layout, the fact that there's no XNT should make for a different experience. Sort of fitting that you're "in the dark" since it's such a dark map. Not a huge deal, but I think the one guy's point about the nat choke being too small is probably valid. The middle bases being so close to those other 2 bases might be problematic. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
you have the trees all black, and the crystals are kind of subdued in lighting as well but the minerals/gas look pretty normal, and so kind of stand out this is obviously a nitpick  | ||
|
Ruinsteel
United States43 Posts
| ||
| ||
