|
CruX Frost
Overview :
Bases :
+ Show Spoiler +Main Natural Expansion Third Vulnerable to Ground Harass Third Vulnerable to Air Harass ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/99geBgj.png) ]
Aesthetics :
+ Show Spoiler +
Map Name : CruX Frost
Tileset : Zhakul'Das, Niflheim, Kaldir, Typhon
Size : 154x154
Suggested Players : 2 Players for 1v1, 4 players for FFA
Amount Of Resources :
Main : 8m 2g (1 o'clock 5 o'clock 7 o'clock 11 o'clock)
Natural : 8m 2g (4 of them)
Third : 8m 2g (8 of them)
Version : 1.1
Concept And History :
A Frosty Forest
Created by Semmo
teamcrux.tistory.com
ksunwoo6@naver.com
Twitter: @CruxSemmo
Type :
Strategy, Macro-Oriented
Comments :
Hi, I'm Semmo. Hope you enjoy!
ALL SPAWNS ENABLED
VODs
+ Show Spoiler +
Replays:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
United Kingdom12057 Posts
A crux map without a super easy to take third/fourth, I think I'm in heaven!
I love the design of the map, the textures you've used and also the layout. It's nice to see another 4 player map too, there's been a lot of 2 player maps recently.
One of my favourite features is the back path that connects both the third base areas.
|
Reminded me of Frigid Pass somewhat at first, but looks like it plays out very differently after taking a second look. Will have to give this one a try, liking it so far.
|
Congratulations on getting into Crux 
|
Wow this map is HUGE. I like the way the thirds are set up so that you always got an option away from your opponent.
Is the destructable debris still not avaliable in the editor since you go with depots? Or is there another reason?
I like the back paths, but i am not sure about the decision to make them curved like that.
|
On February 24 2013 20:45 ScorpSCII wrote:Congratulations on getting into Crux
This.
Although, the main and nat look uncomfortably narrow, the natural specifically. On the other hand, I quite like the unorthodox expansion pattern, especially in late-game scenarios. This map definitely has a BW look and feel to it.
|
my what a big map you have
|
Are all spawns enabled? Even horizontal? If so, this map has the potential to play very interestingly. I like it.
|
I've always liked the design of this map, from when you showed me about 6 months ago. Great progress, especially in the aesthetic department.
The layout requires the map to be large- 152x152 is perfectly fine. Any smaller and distances would get short in vertical, especially at 3 bases with a TvX. All spawn positions will work nicely, and it's not linear!
Great example of how to use "wasted space" correctly. The dead space is crucial to making the distances long enough and preventing tanking of the natural. I hope we get to see the map in action.
|
Sexy looking map.
I'm curious though, can widow mines kill workers at the third (on the cliff above it)? I'll guess I'll try it out.
As a terran player this maps looks very sexy.
|
On February 25 2013 03:33 monitor wrote:
I've always liked the design of this map, from when you showed me about 6 months ago. Great progress, especially in the aesthetic department.
The layout requires the map to be large- 152x152 is perfectly fine. Any smaller and distances would get short in vertical, especially at 3 bases with a TvX. All spawn positions will work nicely, and it's not linear!
Great example of how to use "wasted space" correctly. The dead space is crucial to making the distances long enough and preventing tanking of the natural. I hope we get to see the map in action.
Yep!
I wish it was smaller but it can't really be done. Huge aesthetics improvement. Still needs more detail work and a bit of technique, imo, but it still looks nice.
|
- Is it just me or do the main/nat seem incredibly cramped?
- The cross-spawns seem like the least interesting spawns by far, and I wouldn't want to get them if I played the map. The XNTs are just so strong in those spawns, unlike the other spawns where they aren't quite as powerful. The reason - if you want to use the paths that circumvent the tower vision, you have to go much farther if it's cross spawn, so it's much more dangerous and less likely to happen.
Other than those 2 quibbles I like the map, aesthetics and layout are both pretty good.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On February 25 2013 02:13 a176 wrote:
my what a big map you have
The crux is strong with this one.
|
The map size is completely reasonable for this layout. Anything smaller would make the distances between bases too close.
I'm especially interested in how games unfold if the players spawn horizontally from one another.
|
Congrats in getting into Crux! <3
I'd probably like to agree with most of the feedback so far and say that the natural does look a little bit too cramped.
On February 24 2013 20:46 Sumadin wrote:
Is the destructable debris still not avaliable in the editor since you go with depots? Or is there another reason?
I like the back paths, but i am not sure about the decision to make them curved like that.
If i recall correctly then when people right click banelings on the unbuildable plates/rocks then they detonate on them, whereas with neutral supply depots they do not. That might be a reason some people may still use depots. Also, i think this map is on WOL, not HOTS, which could be the other reason!
Now, for my own feedbck. And it's mostly aesthetics stuff.
The texturing is a little sloppy in some places and I think the grass could be refined a little better, I also feel that the manmade textures look a little out of place.
There are crystal doodads scattered near the naturals and vertical thirds but not much near anywhere else.
There is one chasm with fire below but not the others, I think it might be nice if there were fire in the other ones too, it makes a nice contrast to the tileset (atleast in-game, not on the overview!).
As for the layout is there any reasoning behind having those bridges that connect the quarters of the map shifted? On the top middle of the map an army going across that bridge the defending player on the right is going to get a much better concave (the path isnt on the edge of the playable area) whereas on the other hand the defending player on the left gets a slightly smaller concave. Not sure if it would have any effect on gameplay just thought it would be interesting to mention.
|
OK, seriously, why are all Crux members putting (2) after their 4-spawn maps? This annoys me to a highly unreasonable degree, argh.
Err, the map... I really like the layout of the bases. The middle just seems really huge... maybe it's "necessary" for certain matchups, but couldn't there at least be some more terrain there or something? It's just flat ground with a hole in the middle...
|
On February 25 2013 11:05 bduddy wrote:
OK, seriously, why are all Crux members putting (2) after their 4-spawn maps? This annoys me to a highly unreasonable degree, argh.
I'm reasonably sure that the number in brackets is normally the suggested players, in this case it's a 1v1 map or "2p" map. If he intended this to be a 2v2 map he would have put (4).
That's how I've always seen it anyway.
Edit: though there are other people who like to put (4) instead, not sure which way was the correct format all this time.
|
On February 25 2013 12:43 eTcetRa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 11:05 bduddy wrote:
OK, seriously, why are all Crux members putting (2) after their 4-spawn maps? This annoys me to a highly unreasonable degree, argh. I'm reasonably sure that the number in brackets is normally the suggested players, in this case it's a 1v1 map or "2p" map. If he intended this to be a 2v2 map he would have put (4). That's how I've always seen it anyway. Edit: though there are other people who like to put (4) instead, not sure which way was the correct format all this time.
The number in brackets represents the number of available spawn locations. For instance, Lost Temple had (4) despite being primarily a 1v1 map. It's not the suggested players as much as it is the highest possible amount of players. ^^
Also this map looks really gnarly. I wish TL (or anyone else, really) would run another community map tournament, I would love to see some pros play on this! Good job!
|
i love the path behind the third bases
|
Very similar to another map.. Don't recall the name.. The one with ultras blocking forcefields on narrow ramps, but you made that one aswell, right? So I guess this is the spiritual successor to that one.
Anyway, it's good to see some four player/spawn mirror maps, too often they seem to be neglected in favor of the rotational ones (which really is beyond me ('perfect' balance and what not).
The only minor concern I have is that in horizontal spawns if you expand vertically the fourth seems really far away. But I suppose this might be less of a deal than I make it out to be in my head.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KpYAI.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gtfJ7qB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/EVPdsjO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FJV1KyF.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RSRDNYR.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JnatLwD.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KVuFh3F.png)
