On February 12 2013 15:59 Gfire wrote:
I think some of the geysers are in a bad spot and require four workers to saturate... I hope that can be adjusted before anything major.

nice catch, I agree some look like they are too diagonal.
Anyway, Grats scorp on the addition !

SigmaFiE

United States333 Posts

February 12 2013 14:45 GMT

#26

On February 12 2013 17:35 Fatam wrote:

Show nested quote +

nice catch, I agree some look like they are too diagonal.

Thanks for the spot guys. We will make sure if there is any error here that needs to be corrected that it is done so. Scorp is on the case!

Master of DalK

Canada1803 Posts

February 12 2013 22:42 GMT

#27

DF ATLAS soooo goooooood!

New maps ftw! :D

Zennith

United States795 Posts

February 12 2013 23:47 GMT

#28

This map is incredibly rough for zerg, I've found, especially when not cross map. Protoss can attack when it's not cross positions in literally like, ten seconds.

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 12 2013 23:51 GMT

#29

Cross the map seems okay, but non cross it seems a bit too easy to expand towards your opponent. Which is always a problem that rotational maps are going to have. It's easier to not put a base in between both players on a 2 player map or an axially symmetric one.

Truth be told I don't feel non cross rotational symmetry works unless you do it on one of those huge maps or you do it so that you have to go through the centre to go in any direction.

TheFish7

United States2824 Posts

February 13 2013 00:31 GMT

#30

Hey congrats on on GSTL... I am stoked

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 13 2013 01:33 GMT

#31

On February 13 2013 08:47 Zennith wrote:
This map is incredibly rough for zerg, I've found, especially when not cross map. Protoss can attack when it's not cross positions in literally like, ten seconds.

Well, it's not literally 10 seconds, so what do you mean? The distance is reasonable. Certainly shorter than some of the huuuuuge maps we have now, but not too short as to be unplayable.

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 13 2013 01:44 GMT

#32

Issue isn't distance, the issue is the ease of expanding in your face. Say in mech TvZ if Z spawns CCW to you. I'd take the third closest to Z and then the fourth under his base and park tanks there, what's he going to do against it? Kill me before I get a fourth I suppose. The distance of hopping from one expo to the next is minute and so is the amount of counter attack paths Z can take to stop this. What this map creates in non cross pos is 2 players and a line of expansions almost linearly between them. What you want is force people to go side of each other to some degree to expand. Being able to expand forward to your opponent with each expansion where each expo is very close to the old one is very powerful in mech TvZ and no slouch for certain styles of PvZ either.

monitor

United States2408 Posts

February 13 2013 02:11 GMT

#33

Congrats on getting into the GSL!

Unfortunately, I think the map is broken in close positions once the rocks break. Too easy to expand aggressively, making the distances too short. I think the pathway with rocks just shouldn't exist.

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

February 13 2013 02:18 GMT

#34

If we're talking about aggressive 4ths, that's quite a stretch from what we've seen players choose to do recently. I assume the discussion is about zerg matchups, in which case the 4th base timing is either too early to be secure if taken towards the opponent, or will happen around the time BLs come out -- also insecure. I understand the appeal for a mech player to get bases where they want their army position anyway, but this also a liability and I think in the highest skill games players will tend to respect this more. Moreover, a counterattack style to respond to this type of play is very underexplored because it rarely comes up, and it's a new metagame with new units, so I think that kind of prognostication is a bit premature.

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 13 2013 02:41 GMT

#35

The thing with removing the rocks and putting a wall or a crevasse in its place is that it becomes a 'STuff must go through the centre' map, making centre control very strong and limiting counter attacks. I mean, imagine the rocks to be walls, then put an army locking of those two chokes in front of the other third and you stop someone from ever leaving their base. In fact, it then becomes impossible to reach any other main from any main by ground without stepping through the one single tower's vision to illustrate the severity of the problem.

I feel the only way to salvage this map is flat out remove the rocks or make them very low hp and make it cross only.

Zennith

United States795 Posts

February 13 2013 05:42 GMT

#36

On February 13 2013 11:41 SiskosGoatee wrote:
The thing with removing the rocks and putting a wall or a crevasse in its place is that it becomes a 'STuff must go through the centre' map, making centre control very strong and limiting counter attacks. I mean, imagine the rocks to be walls, then put an army locking of those two chokes in front of the other third and you stop someone from ever leaving their base. In fact, it then becomes impossible to reach any other main from any main by ground without stepping through the one single tower's vision to illustrate the severity of the problem.

I feel the only way to salvage this map is flat out remove the rocks or make them very low hp and make it cross only.

This would work, I think.

RFDaemoniac

United States544 Posts

February 13 2013 06:25 GMT

#37

What about making the ramp from the natural to the low ground third much skinnier so that you can defend your natural more easily from a forward third, as well as pushing the rocks closer to the low ground third so that they can't be killed from the safety of your high ground? or would this not be enough?

IronManSC

United States2119 Posts

February 13 2013 06:38 GMT

#38

After being gone for months, I returned to say congratulations on getting this map out into the public. At first glance I fell in love with this map and knew it was perfect, then realized later in the thread that it had made the GSTL! Amazing work!

SiskosGoatee

Albania1482 Posts

February 13 2013 12:43 GMT

#39

Let us not exaggerate, perfect is a stretch, it's a solid map that is potentially broken when not forced cross.

Also, surely it is imbalanced in PvT since timetwister beat me here after I lost 2 full medivacs doing nothing, can't have my record blemished can we.

OxyGenesis

United Kingdom281 Posts

February 13 2013 12:50 GMT

#40

Cross only would absolutely destroy this map, as I've said before, the whole purpose of a 4p map is for the close positions and the varied games that the different positions give, cross only may as well be a 2p map.

I think close positions on this map work really well, the rocks are only there to delay pushes, by which point the terrain provides numerous flanking opportunities and counterattack paths. Anyway, time will tell I guess, congrats on getting it in GSTL and Assembly Scorp :D