|
On December 20 2012 03:39 moskonia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 01:50 lorestarcraft wrote:On December 19 2012 20:12 moskonia wrote:On December 19 2012 19:40 Sumadin wrote:
I could see this map being really broken for terran. It is not at your fault really, island maps in general favors terran. But nothing here is done to try to mitrigate that advantage.
Since Island maps are kinda tricky i will try to pinpoint flaws.
First what you did right:
2 bases on main islands. That is the correct number, less than that and Zerg is screwed, more and the hole island theme is screwed.
Blink distance islands: A neat touch that can certainly help protoss. Protoss aren't that bad in islands but certainly not as good as terran.
Problems pretty much everything else:
It is 2 player spawn only. This means Terrans can reliably scout using scans. On 4 player island maps scans is too unreliable for initial scouting, and that is one of the ways the advantage of terran can be graducally evened out.
Very low distances compareably: With this size it might as well have been a normal map. Terrans are the least mobile in air meaning they want smaller distances. Viking/Raven however is a combination unbeatable in Air-to-Air straight up. But here there is little room to exploit the added mobility for Phoenixes and Mutas.
Finally this is really not the type of map to put high yield bases on, as much as i like to see them return to competative Starcraft. I really do not understand some of your points, Terran is not the strongest in HotS, What? What are you even basing this one? No one even has enough games in to make a judgement on the best race in HotS. I obviously meant in air, and of course its pretty much theorycraft but tempests can kill everything from range, nothing beats void rays per supply (for all I know) and the phoenix is the fastest unit in the air - allowing for harass while preventing harass from the opponent.
Vikings still beats Void rays, they are faster and have longer range. Phoenix is technically stronger but when ravens deploy their PDD it turns over quickly. Also Battlecruisers if need be.
Tempest is a largely a wild card. It can technically fire from a safe distance, but whatever is providing vision will still be pwned by the vikings.
TvP is basicly hard to predict when it comes to Island/Air maps. Which is good that means it is likely to be balanceable. I am just very worried for Zerg. Their Air-to-Air is by far the weakest of all races now. With Infestors rebuffed they might have a chance. But i am worried.
|
On December 20 2012 06:07 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 03:39 moskonia wrote:On December 20 2012 01:50 lorestarcraft wrote:On December 19 2012 20:12 moskonia wrote:On December 19 2012 19:40 Sumadin wrote:
I could see this map being really broken for terran. It is not at your fault really, island maps in general favors terran. But nothing here is done to try to mitrigate that advantage.
Since Island maps are kinda tricky i will try to pinpoint flaws.
First what you did right:
2 bases on main islands. That is the correct number, less than that and Zerg is screwed, more and the hole island theme is screwed.
Blink distance islands: A neat touch that can certainly help protoss. Protoss aren't that bad in islands but certainly not as good as terran.
Problems pretty much everything else:
It is 2 player spawn only. This means Terrans can reliably scout using scans. On 4 player island maps scans is too unreliable for initial scouting, and that is one of the ways the advantage of terran can be graducally evened out.
Very low distances compareably: With this size it might as well have been a normal map. Terrans are the least mobile in air meaning they want smaller distances. Viking/Raven however is a combination unbeatable in Air-to-Air straight up. But here there is little room to exploit the added mobility for Phoenixes and Mutas.
Finally this is really not the type of map to put high yield bases on, as much as i like to see them return to competative Starcraft. I really do not understand some of your points, Terran is not the strongest in HotS, What? What are you even basing this one? No one even has enough games in to make a judgement on the best race in HotS. I obviously meant in air, and of course its pretty much theorycraft but tempests can kill everything from range, nothing beats void rays per supply (for all I know) and the phoenix is the fastest unit in the air - allowing for harass while preventing harass from the opponent. Vikings still beats Void rays, they are faster and have longer range. Phoenix is technically stronger but when ravens deploy their PDD it turns over quickly. Also Battlecruisers if need be. Tempest is a largely a wild card. It can technically fire from a safe distance, but whatever is providing vision will still be pwned by the vikings. TvP is basicly hard to predict when it comes to Island/Air maps. Which is good that means it is likely to be balanceable. I am just very worried for Zerg. Their Air-to-Air is by far the weakest of all races now. With Infestors rebuffed they might have a chance. But i am worried.
You're forgetting about the Oracle's Revelation ability. It gives the Protoss vision of units or buildings affected by the ability at range 9 for 60 seconds, and cannot be removed. So between Revelation and Observers, Protoss should always have the vision to maximize Tempest's 15 range.
|
I think it'd be cool if you moved the Watch Towers to the mid islands above the mains that have nothing on them.
EDIT: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XDnWQ.jpg)
These ones
|
TopRamen, you can't just say "I think you should do that", you need to provide reasoning, why should they be moved, what will it improve over the current location, etc. Simply stating an idea without any reasoning is really not helpful.
|
What I like most about this map is the lack of air space. It means ground armies might actually be viable. Blink stalkers can make their way between basically every base, which is great.
Unfortunately, as we get to the late game, a clear hierarchy will form in the air armies. Protoss>Terran>Zerg. Between tempests, carriers, void rays, phoenixes, and oracles, Protoss has the most powerful and most diverse air army. It isn't totally clear how useful Ravens will be, however. PDD will counter every anti-air attack from Protoss apart from from void rays, which aren't so good against vikings, while the new Seeker Missile will do pretty great versus carriers and tempests. Meanwhile, Zerg's air army is basically corruptors, which will be completely shut down by PDD and vikings, and aren't even very good against carriers, tempests and battlecruisers, which they are supposed to be good against.
ZvP will be a Protoss opening nexus first into stargate, maybe even double stargate, while the Zerg will likely open mutas, only to be shut down by phoenix, or go for 2 base hydra/roachhydra with drops, which shouldn't be too difficult for a 2 base Protoss to deal with assuming they've already scouted with their phoenixes. After holding off any of Zerg's 2 base pressure, the Protoss will get up a robo and a warp prism and move to take a third. Once Protoss manages to secure their third base, they'll start transitioning to carriers and tempests, at which point Zerg can really only make corruptors. At that point, Zerg will be desperately trying to secure as many bases as they can through nydus/drops, which is a significant expense to them, and defending them with a combination of static defense and corruptors from the much more mobile phoenix/void ray/ oracle harassment fleet of the Protoss. Eventually the Protoss will max out their air army on 3/3 upgrades and attack-move around the map for the win.
ZvT will feature a zerg either going 2 base muta, or some variety of 2 base nydus all-in. Any mutalisk play will be crippled by the necessity of spending gas on drops or nydus to take a third, meaning it won't be hard at all for a 2 base Terran to deal with. The mutas will mainly exist to prevent Terran from taking a third until they develop a large enough viking/raven fleet. The ravens will be essential, using PDD to zone out mutas allowing the CC to transfer to the third and for turrets and other defense to be constructed. Once Terran has secured their third, they will tech to a giant viking/raven army, at which point Zerg can really only make corruptors. Hydras might be a good option, but I think with a couple of banshees and a ton of PDDs, Terran should have no problem cleaning that up. Infestors would be very useful, but ferrying them around to protect different bases would be extremely difficult, and trying to attack with them would be almost impossible.
That's just my theorycrafting from a Zerg player's perspective. Man I wish we had scourge.
|
I don't really see any of the reasoning behind the design of the map, but island maps have serious potential imo. The expo pattern doesn't really make much sense to me and I'm not sure what kind of gameplay you were going for. I remember a few awesome island maps in bw, here are a few.
http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4471.jpg
http://www.panschk.de/mappage/Twin Headed Snake IMG.jpg
I forgot the names of most of them  Point is, my favorite island maps have some sort of purpose behind them and the expo layout has clear reasoning.
|
I think at least the gold bases make sense. To defend them you need your army or at least part of it a good ways from your main, so it's a risk.
I was thinking about the below changes to make it a bit more contiguous and zerg friendly (this way the zerg only needs a single nydus to get stuff from his main to the mainland and he more or less would be fine. Infestors would still be viable, etc. Golds would still be an "island" but are harassable via the cliff.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DWtcl.jpg)
Maybe also put rocks in 2 of the XNT chokes if you want it to play a bit more macro-y.
|
On December 20 2012 07:10 moskonia wrote:
TopRamen, you can't just say "I think you should do that", you need to provide reasoning, why should they be moved, what will it improve over the current location, etc. Simply stating an idea without any reasoning is really not helpful.
Well, I don't know that it would be a good change, I think it could be potentially cool.
But I think it'd be cool because it can force players to split up units more. Not by a ton, but some.
Idk, it's a pretty general idea, my bad.
|
On December 20 2012 10:15 TopRamen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 07:10 moskonia wrote:
TopRamen, you can't just say "I think you should do that", you need to provide reasoning, why should they be moved, what will it improve over the current location, etc. Simply stating an idea without any reasoning is really not helpful. Well, I don't know that it would be a good change, I think it could be potentially cool. But I think it'd be cool because it can force players to split up units more. Not by a ton, but some. Idk, it's a pretty general idea, my bad.
You can't really have real reasoning at this point other than theorycrafting. I think "it's cool" is as valid a reason as any to change something to an island map at this point, since we have no idea how it will play out.
|
For a map of this type, I would feature a large central island with a higher resource density in order to provide build variety. Tons of small islands necessitates air play, but the central island would allow tactics based around delivering a strong positional army to middle.
I would at the very least relocate the golds. Gold bases should be in contested areas, and definitely not tucked away safely in a corner. There's absolutely no reason NOT to take that base, no risk/reward. However, the gold provides an influx of minerals, which is not as helpful for air..
Hm... It would be interesting to see gold bases with one vespane on small islands, and regular minerals with rich vespanes on the mid island, giving ground armies a legit reason to contest islands, and air a legit reason to contest the center.
|
On a side note, some people are suggesting things like connecting up many of the islands so that ground armies can move between them. That's a fine type of map as well imo, but I think both styles need to be tried separately. This map on its own can only do one or the other, and there doesn't seem to be any point to changing it to the other one.
|
I would at the very least relocate the golds. Gold bases should be in contested areas
That's exactly why gold bases shouldn't be in the middle. The player who is ahead will control the middle, so putting gold bases there puts them even farther ahead.
|
On December 20 2012 14:33 Fatam wrote:Show nested quote +I would at the very least relocate the golds. Gold bases should be in contested areas That's exactly why gold bases shouldn't be in the middle. The player who is ahead will control the middle, so putting gold bases there puts them even farther ahead.
That's pretty much the point of an objective. Granted, I don't really like gold bases in general, but they should not be free, otherwise whats the point?
|
I sorta see what you're saying. You could argue that a base in the corner isn't free because you're taking a risk allocating resources into something that's far away from your main and hard/dangerous to defend if it's attacked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
