Sadly I started too late so I won't finish it in time, but my idea for a 3 player map was to not use ramps for the main bases, but to make a pathway like bifrost - a small choke that can be blocked by 1 force field, but you can't build a pylon near it to bypass the force field. I have a nice layout right now but I can't get the multiple watch towers to work, its a very hard concept to work with 3 player maps, unless you just stick them randomly.

I think its a shame that there weren't crazier concepts like last time, but this time it turned up pretty hard, even though both are pretty normal ideas. Maybe I will submit my map after the tournament is finished just to show what I meant here

, cause I think without ramps for the mains, better symmetry can be achieved (even though its still impossible to get perfect symmetry).

ScorpSCII

Denmark499 Posts

January 13 2013 16:02 GMT

#47

On January 13 2013 21:18 OxyGenesis wrote:
I did make a map but the editor crashed as I was saving and lost it T_T 3p maps are a complete bitch!

Aw, that sucks really hard!

lefix

Germany1082 Posts

January 13 2013 16:32 GMT

#48

It's kinda funny that most of the submissions here would have been finalists in the 3p motm month we did way back then :D

ScorpSCII

Denmark499 Posts

January 13 2013 18:53 GMT

#49

On January 14 2013 01:32 lefix wrote:
It's kinda funny that most of the submissions here would have been finalists in the 3p motm month we did way back then :D

Considering all of these maps are done in one day, that is something to be proud of!
Hopefully we will see some of the submissions worked on further and released later on

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

January 13 2013 22:32 GMT

#50

On January 14 2013 01:02 ScorpSCII wrote:

Show nested quote +

Aw, that sucks really hard!

You have all my sympathy t_t

On January 14 2013 00:38 moskonia wrote:
cause I think without ramps for the mains, better symmetry can be achieved (even though its still impossible to get perfect symmetry).

I agree this is a great concept, I tried it once a looong time ago.
From the original motm 3p competition.

Coppermantis

United States845 Posts

January 14 2013 02:58 GMT

#51

The entries look really great!

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

January 14 2013 03:08 GMT

#52

On January 14 2013 11:58 Coppermantis wrote:
The entries look really great!

In order to make maps like those look good, you need a trio of watchful people.

Samro225am

Germany982 Posts

January 14 2013 21:21 GMT

#53

Thanks everyone who contributed a map! The two topics both provided some difficulties on their own and i think for most of us it was hard to copme up with a meaningfull concept that uses both topics in a good way.

Yet five brave map makers did it! Congratulations to you guys.

Submissions

Gfire - Lunar Crusade

NewSunshine - Wormhole

EatThePath - Halflight Byways

Veloh15 - Treesk
[image loading]

Fatam - Gr33n

not much more than a concept sketch, but i liked the happy small guy in a field of purple teats.

On January 13 2013 22:48 Duvon wrote:
Nice maps.
My idea:+ Show Spoiler +

Thought up a concept. The middle xelnagas would be close enough to cliff that roaches could defend them easily.
[image loading]

Warpgates you tell me? :E

POLL AT OP

Gfire

United States1699 Posts

January 14 2013 21:38 GMT

#54

I actually think Devon's concept is pretty cool. Might have to be super big, though. Maybe with some adjustments it could be a really cool map.

It's not exactly symmetrical, though... Would it be better just as a 2p map with only the bottom two spawns available, and something else at the top? Or maybe it's doable as a 3p map with some odd asymmetrical play.

Duvon

Sweden2360 Posts

January 14 2013 22:01 GMT

#55

Alas my sc2 (and editor) are borked right now, and I cba fixing it until I get a new OS and some more memory, so I can't illustrate in firmer print what I am thinking.
:/
I'd think you would have to decrease tower radius, to 16 or 17, or it indeed would get very large. A 2-player change could be making more entrances to the top base, and put the "main" on low ground instead.

PS. When I painted it, it felt a bit like purple sharts... The boobies came last.

Fatam

1986 Posts

January 14 2013 22:20 GMT

#56

Maps are all pretty damn solid. Idk if any of them are particularly outstanding or inspired this time around but this was a tough topic w/ not much time so kudos for working well with tough circumstances.

This is slightly OT but has to do w/ map challenges.. I was thinking you should keep a text file of all the PM'd topics you've received in the past that way people don't have to submit the same ones each time but instead our pool of possible topics grows. Also what if 5 people submitted a topic for the previous challenge but aren't around for the next one? You lose those topics.

(Of course, you would take topics out of the file once they've been used)

Samro225am

Germany982 Posts

January 14 2013 22:23 GMT

#57

On January 15 2013 06:38 Gfire wrote:
I actually think Devon's concept is pretty cool. Might have to be super big, though. Maybe with some adjustments it could be a really cool map.

It's not exactly symmetrical, though... Would it be better just as a 2p map with only the bottom two spawns available, and something else at the top? Or maybe it's doable as a 3p map with some odd asymmetrical play.

On January 15 2013 07:01 Duvon wrote:
Alas my sc2 (and editor) are borked right now, and I cba fixing it until I get a new OS and some more memory, so I can't illustrate in firmer print what I am thinking.
:/
I'd think you would have to decrease tower radius, to 16 or 17, or it indeed would get very large. A 2-player change could be making more entrances to the top base, and put the "main" on low ground instead.

PS. When I painted it, it felt a bit like purple sharts... The boobies came last.

i did not mean to bash your concept or presentation, but there actually is a small happy face on that painting so i could not pass on fooling around with the purple things.

On January 15 2013 07:20 Fatam wrote:
Maps are all pretty damn solid. Idk if any of them are particularly outstanding or inspired this time around but this was a tough topic w/ not much time so kudos for working well with tough circumstances.

This is slightly OT but has to do w/ map challenges.. I was thinking you should keep a text file of all the PM'd topics you've received in the past that way people don't have to submit the same ones each time but instead our pool of possible topics grows. Also what if 5 people submitted a topic for the previous challenge but aren't around for the next one? You lose those topics.

(Of course, you would take topics out of the file once they've been used)

There always are more topics than maps submissions. Also such a list does not make sense because many ideas just come up multiple times each time.

last but not least i think when meta game and meta map mal´king changes the suggestes topics change as well, so i would like to keep it a frsh thing each time.

as a conclusion i just do not see enough arguments to keep such a list somewhere and keep it up to date. right now the person administrating the map jam & challenge can just count the number of submissions, start the randomizer and tehn count through the PMs to number x and y.

i agree on what you note about the maps. nothing really outstanding and inspired, yet the quality is really good for the tough challenge we had here.

Duvon

Sweden2360 Posts

January 14 2013 23:17 GMT

#58

Oh did I come off as defensive? not what I wanted.

I love whacky maps so this is just pure gold for me!

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

January 15 2013 05:02 GMT

#59

i agree on what you note about the maps. nothing really outstanding and inspired, yet the quality is really good for the tough challenge we had here.

Indeed, for 24hour maps these are not shabby at all.

@veloh: The more I look at your map the more awesome it seems. Definitely consider tuning it up to its potential!

@gfire: Did you consider using mineral blocks on the backdoor ramps instead of rocks? Or both?

Gfire

United States1699 Posts

January 15 2013 05:11 GMT

#60

I'd consider mineral blocks. Somehow it didn't cross my mind. It might be better though. TBH it's hard to say exactly how it with play with either rocks or minerals, since both are pretty uncommon in SC2. Minerals, though, you might be able to get through more quickly as the defender, which seems like it could be a good thing.