| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Meerel
Germany713 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YvvtNgp.jpg) Hi, i made a retexture/redoodad version of Match Point for Hots i hope you like it. Overview: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2aATsTd.jpg) General: + Show Spoiler + Texture: Custom Playable: 152x168 Expands: 10 + 2 small Xel'Naga: 2 Pictures: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bHbZKLy.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tslql1h.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VPv4hK4.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/osk0cur.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1b59seD.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xhT4unB.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1VTtHGq.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FgSeWSK.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bao91wm.jpg) | ||
|
isaachukfan
Canada785 Posts
| ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
Yeah I think it would be good to remove towers and to make the natural ramp wider. Other than that looks really fun  . | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
| ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
On March 20 2013 07:31 Qikz wrote: I think the natural ramp personally being that small is fine since you should be able to attack from the highground (from above the third) and it adds defenders advantage against all ins who try and rush up the ramp. You really should remove the towers though. That's true, good point. I can't get over how good the texturing is for this map (I don't know why I like it so much! Nostalgia blast!). I love, love the cliff edges. Fewer/no towers is definitely something I would like to see that doesn't really happen. I don't know why map makers feel the need to put in towers just because they are there. | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10196 Posts
 i guess sc2 maps are smaller so thats where you compensated xD | ||
|
thezanursic
5489 Posts
| ||
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
Could you move the towers back a little from the ramp? It's hard for defender to position units at the top of the ramp. | ||
|
Mullet_Ben
United States54 Posts
| ||
|
PineapplePizza
United States749 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
Meerel
Germany713 Posts
On March 20 2013 10:46 Mullet_Ben wrote: As cool as those cliffs are, how do reapers and colossi look moving up and down them? i have no idea^^ gonna change the tower some tomorrow | ||
|
ciox
58 Posts
| ||
|
gronnelg
Norway354 Posts
Loving the aesthetics though. Great BW look. Edit: Imba primarly because of FF. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On March 20 2013 18:58 gronnelg wrote: Wouldn't this map be totally imba because of the narrow chokes, and generally lack of open spaces? Loving the aesthetics though. Great BW look. Edit: Imba primarly because of FF. That's not too much of an issue to be honest as it could just be a map for TvP, TvZ, PvP, PvT, TvT or ZvZ, not all maps have to be balanced for all the matchups and if they are it's usually quite a boring map. Echoing what someone said before it'd be good to either remove the gas from the third and make it mineral only as it's so easy to take, or atleast make it a one gas expo with less minerals or something. It's so easy to hold that base. EDIT: As I can't check right now, can you still nuke the fifth opposing players 5th bases from inside your main? I used to really like that about match point. | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
The 1x ramp at the nat is debatable. It makes three bases easier to defend, on the other hand it also makes defending against a sieged position on the nat harder. Not sure how exactly this would play out for all matchups. | ||
|
KingCorwin
United States134 Posts
has very BW feel | ||
|
Meerel
Germany713 Posts
| ||
|
Quakecomm
United States344 Posts
| ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
I like the narrowness of the top ramp to the 4th for emphasizing the high ground. I think there are better ways to alleviate the problem than widening it, which will just turn the map into another wack-a-mole army movement situation that is so familiar in other maps, or even force more reserved turtling. For example, you could make it unforcefieldable, unbuildable, etc... | ||
|
Meerel
Germany713 Posts
On March 21 2013 05:28 Quakecomm wrote: Nice map but where is it published? EU | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Will try the map later, thank you. | ||
|
Antares777
United States1971 Posts
The mineral wall looks a bit different but I'm sure it functions the same way. I hope all of the small chokes everywhere don't cause too much trouble as far as balance goes.  | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On March 21 2013 04:12 Terranlover wrote: how about making the 1size ramp to the fourth 3 and removing the towers completly? Keep the one size ramp to the fourth, it's fine and adds some defenders advantage meaning a small force can stay back and defend the ramp (especially with like Blinding Cloud as zerg). Having defenders advantage is a good thing and it promotes people to split up their army as going up with every single unit (like on a 3 ramps do as you're not guarenteed to do super damage. It promotes a lot more positional play and less a-move up every ramp you see as there's no way you'll hold it. There's plenty of other ways to attack and other places to attack, having one expansion with good advantage to the defender isn't bad, especially when the natural can be sieged and the third isn't exactly super easy to defend. Remove the towers though. | ||
|
FlaShFTW
United States10196 Posts
ramps still need widening. they were the pinnacle of where big push engagements were held. now, even trying to go up one with a big push = aoe just rips through that cluster fuck. | ||
|
iKill
Denmark861 Posts
On March 20 2013 13:15 Ooshmagoosh wrote: Why is a mineral-only not an option for SC2? all races are gas heavy in the midgame and lategame, so no one is going to take them. | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
On March 21 2013 12:16 FlaShFTW wrote: remove towers on BW based maps. theres a reason the bw maps were successful without towers, you should keep it that way. ramps still need widening. they were the pinnacle of where big push engagements were held. now, even trying to go up one with a big push = aoe just rips through that cluster fuck. You seem to ignore the fact that this highground works completely differently in SC2 cos of the lack of highground advantages. I think Mereel was just trying to give the army on the highground an advantage with the tower and rather small ramps. Cos with huge ramps and no tower there is really no advantage whatsoever being on it, it's actually rly shit if it's too open (altho it's still in the perfect position to defend 4 bases). On the other hand small ramps obviously also make it harder to attack down the highground, and that's actually the really idiotic thing about chokes as the only terrain advantage, they work both ways instead of giving only one side the advantage... So imo the ramps should be wider, the tower should be kept and imo it would be good if that path down from the highground that makes a clockwise turn towards the centre (the one leading to the lowest lowground) is thin enough so that it would be kinda awkward to move up there with an army on the highground. Besides that and the tower there's nothing good to emulate advantage for that highground I guess... (fuck no highground advantage). | ||
|
r1flEx
Belgium256 Posts
 | ||
|
therockmanxx
Peru1174 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs EffOrt
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
The PondCast
CranKy Ducklings
Maestros of the Game
Serral vs herO
Clem vs Reynor
[BSL 2025] Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
