| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Vx2M2.jpg) WoL Version: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ir2ZN.jpg) TPW Sand Castles by lefix Map Size: 154x154 Tileset: Phaeton Spawns: 4 Bases: 16 Published: HotS (Beta), NA About: My second HotS map. This tileset didn't come with many doodads, hopefully that'll change in the future  Screenshots: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DEteT.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZFOj8.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kmg5Y.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/5P7fr.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9RcdG.jpg) | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
| ||
|
Veloh15
United States161 Posts
| ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
| ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
The third base is even trickier. The attacking army on the low ground has both ramps very close, while the defending army has to go a long way around to fully protect the nat and third. it is almost impossible to stop the attacking from coming up your highground. Imho, both scenarios encourage splitting up units and lots of army movement. It's not neccesarily about the distance netweem the chokes, but their alignment and what kind of engagements the suggest. Overall I am pretty happy with this layout. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oKl9t.jpg) | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
Also, quit making maps so fast, I haven't finished any yet. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On November 22 2012 02:21 NewSunshine wrote: Reminds me of Sidewinder. :p Also, quit making maps so fast, I haven't finished any yet. yep. i like the terrain layout in this one a bit better though. | ||
|
chuky500
France473 Posts
And if 2 players are in close position 1 is unfavored because his 3rd will be either wide open and on the low ground, or easy to get dropped. While the other will have an easier 3rd to defend. Overall I don't like 4 player maps because it adds a lot of randomness to the game. If you scout you're opponent's base last you have no idea what he's doing and when you get there you have no idea if he expanded first and you're too late to see if gas were taken because an army is already there. In PvT you have to play completely blind and expand before seeing what the other does, and if it's a 3 rax or an early timing push and you've expanded you've lost. Same thing if you're playing defensive and he's playing greedy. And in PvZ you have 2/3 chances you won't be able to scout an early pool so you have to play defensive, allowing the zerg to be greedy and if he's at the last position you'll discover a double hatch first. That's the main reason why tournaments force cross position, to have consistent games and reduce the randomness. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TSlxW.jpg) The clockwise player can defend their 3rd from the lefix ramp, and this also puts them much closer to the watchtower making it easier to control. But, maybe this is compensation that they also have to expand towards the opponent. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 22 2012 02:40 EatThePath wrote: Ahaha, I knew I couldn't be the only one to notice this pattern.That's it. From now on, I'm calling this a lefix ramp. | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
| ||
|
DontNerfInfestors
Spain280 Posts
| ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
On November 22 2012 01:06 lefix wrote: Well, let me explain my thoughts on army movement on this map. Obviously, there are quite a for nice chokes to intercept attacking armies. if you take 4 bases, there are 3 possible entrances towards your3rd/4th. however, the defending army has a very slightly longer way to reach all 3 entrances, since it needs to move back a little to get up and down the highground. so either the defender is forced to spread his units apart or the attacker will eventually be able to enter your quarter of the map. The third base is even trickier. The attacking army on the low ground has both ramps very close, while the defending army has to go a long way around to fully protect the nat and third. it is almost impossible to stop the attacking from coming up your highground. Imho, both scenarios encourage splitting up units and lots of army movement. It's not neccesarily about the distance netweem the chokes, but their alignment and what kind of engagements the suggest. Overall I am pretty happy with this layout. I am not completely convinced. Could you show us the range of a siege line at the center choke? | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
On November 22 2012 03:46 Aunvilgod wrote: I am not completely convinced. Could you show us the range of a siege line at the center choke? ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/viwvL.jpg) | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
Oh hi Antiga how are you doing? And just to note, this is not necessarily a bad feature. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
| ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
and this map encourages getting at least some air units | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
4 bases is sorrrt of easy to defend, but I don't think every map should have the exact same ease/difficulty of defense as the others, so I'm cool with that. Pretty cool. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On November 22 2012 04:57 Fatam wrote: I like this map if it's cross-spawns only. I see no particular reason why it should be. I should say I'd like to see a new terrain feature from you though, that ramp formation's been all over the place. Just a style thing, but it bumps me. | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
On November 22 2012 05:24 NewSunshine wrote: I see no particular reason why it should be. If players spawn next to each other, when they meet halfway through the rush distance, one player has high ground advantage. Also, at 4 bases the exact same player has his 4th either way more open or much closer to the center AND on the low ground. | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
On November 22 2012 05:59 Aunvilgod wrote: If players spawn next to each other, when they meet halfway through the rush distance, one player has high ground advantage. Also, at 4 bases the exact same player has his 4th either way more open or much closer to the center AND on the low ground. I don't think you would ever take the base close to your opponent if you have the CCW spawn. You would probably take the base farther away from your opponent that is nearer to your lefix ramp. If you want to attack into that base you need to get way out of position. The defender's advantage is not great on this map because the positioning is kind of awkward - if you just camp on your lefix ramp on 3 bases you are leaving your natural exposed. I do see Aunvilgod's point about the highground advantage halfway through the rush distance though. that is big in certain matchups. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On November 22 2012 05:59 Aunvilgod wrote: If players spawn next to each other, when they meet halfway through the rush distance, one player has high ground advantage. So, how often do 2 players meet exactly in the middle? And even if it happened frequently, is this a problem? There's a ramp on both sides of the high ground, so both players need to exercise some caution when pushing out that way. He who has map awareness is better off, working as intended. There's a certain degree to which a rotational map has an asymmetrical balance, for example the far 4th base for the CW player on this map. It's farther to take than the other player's 4th, but it's farther away from the opponent as well, and harder to attack into, and is also much less vulnerable to harassment. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
- a higher % chance of having the highground advantage in fights - a better position for drop/air harass - an easier expansion path if the game goes beyond 3 bases. But it's probably not as imbalanced as some 4p rotationals, so whatever. Better than Metropolis at least. (I do think this map could be mirrored instead of rotational, without too much tweaking necessary after the change) | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
- reduced air space/added a little more space behind mineral lines at third and in mains to make air harass less powerfull in order to reduce rota imbalance - shrinked the highground pods at the xel naga tower to open up the center of the map | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
That's why maps were changed from what they originally were in the first place. They have always been used to MAKE interesting games, not just act as a boring playing field. Players SHOULD react to the map. Maps SHOULD be a major PRESENCE in how games play. Right now the only consideration a player has on a map is just if he has played it a few times to find proxy spots and ovie locations, not how builds should play out based on spawns, best walloff based on spawns, army position and movement based on spawns. With the design of this map there's no reason why a player cannot adapt. I see plenty of scenarios working out differently than you described. If the bottom left spawn were to control the third highground, then the bottom right player would expand away. Yes, his closer lowground would be rendered null. But if you look at the layout, the right bottom spawn has a much straighter route to defending top right and bottom right bases than the bottom left, who has to swing around significantly more terrain. Bottom right also has the highground advantage in defending his 4th. And if bottom right wants to defend top right bases beyond 4th he has to take posture in the center (really both players do). But all these cool interactions are only possible because the map is designed so well <3. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 23 2012 02:15 Qwyn wrote: Sure, the point is a subjective difference of opinion in what constitutes a 'well designed map', I feel this map allows one to easily defend four bases, while that is not a glaring balance problem the way this map does it, it's just not a style of play I personally enjoy playing or seeing a lot of.Why can't players adapt to the map instead of being forced cross-spawn, Aunvilgod? I don't think all maps have to function like that. That's why maps were changed from what they originally were in the first place. They have always been used to MAKE interesting games, not just act as a boring playing field. Players SHOULD react to the map. Maps SHOULD be a major PRESENCE in how games play. Right now the only consideration a player has on a map is just if he has played it a few times to find proxy spots and ovie locations, not how builds should play out based on spawns, best walloff based on spawns, army position and movement based on spawns. With the design of this map there's no reason why a player cannot adapt. I see plenty of scenarios working out differently than you described. If the bottom left spawn were to control the third highground, then the bottom right player would expand away. Yes, his closer lowground would be rendered null. But if you look at the layout, the right bottom spawn has a much straighter route to defending top right and bottom right bases than the bottom left, who has to swing around significantly more terrain. Bottom right also has the highground advantage in defending his 4th. And if bottom right wants to defend top right bases beyond 4th he has to take posture in the center (really both players do). But all these cool interactions are only possible because the map is designed so well <3. When not spawning cross the map also has the basic problem any 4P map will have in that you expand in parallel to each other away from each other rather than how most 2 player maps feature it that you expand in a twirl around the middle. Say you both spawn at the bottom, where's the 8 O clock player going to take the fifth, probably at 9 O clock iefix-ramped base? So what would happen if the other player tried to push that base? A pretty awkward scenario basically. | ||
|
Semmo
Korea (South)627 Posts
1. In this kind of layout, it is inevitable that there will be a convergence point, (therefore kinda turtley) just because of how the mains are placed. However, lefix TRIED to mitigate that somewhat, so props to him for that. It's a limiting layout, after all. imo. 2. The close spawns are obviously going to be imbalanced, but who cares. It's not going to be used in tournament or anything. For general comments, I think the main is too exposed like almost all your other maps :/ Maybe try to lessen this? Whatever though. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
| ||
|
Quakecomm
United States344 Posts
| ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
| ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:50 EatThePath wrote: I personally subjectively don't like it, that's all, It means you expand further and further away from the main of your opponent basically meaning that your main is almost always closer to your opponent than your expansions are, so there's no real reason to go attack his expansions since his main is closer. Basically, if you go attack his expansions with some drop or something you leave yourself open for a counter since it takes him less time to get to your natural from his natural than it does for you to get back with that army.I don't see why a parallel expansion pattern is awkward any more so than the twirl. Elaborate? Depending heavily on the map, they have quite a range of different affects on the lategame. You often see it in tournament play, people often grab a ninja in a far corner of the map when this occurs and even when it gets scouted it's hard to take it out since you have to send a part of your army very far from your own base to do so and you leave yourself open to a counter. | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
players splitting up their army sending small squads of units around the map instead of just camping their deathball in one spot. | ||
|
Quakecomm
United States344 Posts
On November 24 2012 02:13 lefix wrote: the site is pretty much dead atm. we might as well forward the turl to the liquipedia entry, but that one isn't entirely up to date either. not much work has been put into organisatory work at tpw in a while :D That's too bad. I really love all the maps you guys make and would love to see some sort of tpw map tournament or something in the future. Keep up the good work! | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On November 24 2012 07:30 lefix wrote: Yes, and that's exactly what you can't do with such a map because you leave yourself open to a counter, you have to travel further to attack it than he has to counter you, you're missing a part of your army if you go attack it. Why not just use your entire deathball to attack his main then which is closer by?eh, that's exactly the kind of thing you want to have (at least i do). players splitting up their army sending small squads of units around the map instead of just camping their deathball in one spot. What you ideally want to promote splitting is a triangle. Basically, if his main/natural is m2, yours is m1, his expansion is e2, You want the distance of m1e2 to be smaller than m1m2, but larger than m2e2. If the distance to your main from his expansion is smaller than the distance to his main from that expansion, he'll most likely just park his army at that expansion and make it his new main and staging point. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On November 24 2012 08:31 SiskosGoatee wrote: Yes, and that's exactly what you can't do with such a map because you leave yourself open to a counter, you have to travel further to attack it than he has to counter you, you're missing a part of your army if you go attack it. Why not just use your entire deathball to attack his main then which is closer by? What you ideally want to promote splitting is a triangle. Basically, if his main/natural is m2, yours is m1, his expansion is e2, You want the distance of m1e2 to be smaller than m1m2, but larger than m2e2. If the distance to your main from his expansion is smaller than the distance to his main from that expansion, he'll most likely just park his army at that expansion and make it his new main and staging point. This all depends on the intervening terrain. The player who wants to harass / attack expansions should be able to take a position in the center that covers their side while they push the defender into one corner or another, allowing an attack in the undefended region. Obviously some maps don't work well for this and that is one reason you could say it's a poor map. | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
| ||
|
Meltage
Germany613 Posts
Its a good port, wol -Z hots | ||
| ||
|
|
RSL Revival
Reynor vs Astrea
Classic vs sOs
Maestros of the Game
Serral vs Ryung
ByuN vs Zoun
BSL Team Wars
Team Bonyth vs Team Dewalt
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
GuMiho vs Cham
ByuN vs TriGGeR
Cosmonarchy
TriGGeR vs YoungYakov
YoungYakov vs HonMonO
HonMonO vs TriGGeR
Maestros of the Game
Solar vs Bunny
Clem vs Rogue
[BSL 2025] Weekly
RSL Revival
Cure vs Bunny
Creator vs Zoun
Maestros of the Game
Maru vs Lambo
herO vs ShoWTimE
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
