|
Monty's Island v 0.1
Uploaded to [NA] [EU]
By: Rife
Battle it out on the infamous pirate Monty's installation.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OQWinbo.jpg)
Stats:
Spawns: 2
Playable Map Bounds: 140 x 136
Main to Main: 72 seconds (Town hall to town hall).
Natural to Natural: 60 seconds (Town hall to town hall).
Main to Main: 65 seconds (Ramp to ramp).
Natural to Natural: 50 seconds (Ramp to ramp).
12 Bases
2 XNT
Concept:+ Show Spoiler +This map was conceived as an "island" map for SC2. The first three bases are intentionally easily defended from ground attacks. Air play and dropping is the style of play best suited for this map. I also wanted the first three bases to be relatively easy to take because after that you are heavily exposed if you don't have map control. If you want to secure a 4th, 5th, or 6th base you will need to control parts of the middle of the map
Changelog:+ Show Spoiler +Widened entrance to third/natural area.
Connected the side paths with the middle and widened the side paths.
Changed middle to open it up more and make it so that it is harder for siege tanks and collosi to attack the island bases from the center of the map.
I would love to hear your comments and feedback!
|
I'm really impressed. It's so completely non-standard, but it looks like a ton of fun to play on.
The third looks maybe a bit too easy to defend, which is really hard to deal with in a couple of matchups. Maybe remove that hop-up and widen the low-ground path instead? Just an idea.
Anyways, interesting idea and good execution.
|
On April 26 2013 14:31 sevia wrote:
I'm really impressed. It's so completely non-standard, but it looks like a ton of fun to play on.
The third looks maybe a bit too easy to defend, which is really hard to deal with in a couple of matchups. Maybe remove that hop-up and widen the low-ground path instead? Just an idea.
Anyways, interesting idea and good execution.
Agreed - right now it looks like you could probably FFE in front of the 3rd.
|
Easy fix if you dent in the corner of the main and fill in the ground up to the cliff (much more open area between nat and 3rd and middle).
|
Seems like a pretty cool map actually. I was a bit skeptical at first, but the more I look at it, the more I like it.
We'll just have to see how it turns out. If it's possible for all races to reliable get past 3 bases, this map should be quite fun.
|
Great layout, a shame you used this tileset (I personally dislike the space tileset except the hots protoss one).
One concern: The middle four expansions are easier, faster and safer to take as Terran with rocks blocking the ramp and not the expansion itself. This might promote fast 3 base Terran openings that ramp up to very deadly timings as opposed to zerg and toss unable to do the same.
Things you could do to reduce this possible problem (only pick one):
- Reduce the health of the rocks blocking those ramps.
- Add a creep tumor to the expansion.
- Move the ramps to all face inwards, making the position harder to defend (aim the ramps to the center of the map).
- Widen the ramp by 50%.
- Make it a collapsable rock tower instead of the blocking rocks.
Other than that, awesome layout, very unorthodox 
|
I think you do quite a good job of encouraging air play without making ground armies unusable or disallowing "ground-based" strategies. Terran being strong might be a valid criticism but its hard to say for sure since there are pretty much 0 island maps out there. Nice!
|
On April 27 2013 00:03 TheFish7 wrote:
I think you do quite a good job of encouraging air play without making ground armies unusable or disallowing "ground-based" strategies. Terran being strong might be a valid criticism but its hard to say for sure since there are pretty much 0 island maps out there. Nice!
I agree with this post completely. The reason I would predict terran to have more strength on this map is the setup of the third. Once again, very good job of promoting air play in this map. Also +1 for BW style of map description.
|
On April 26 2013 14:31 sevia wrote:
I'm really impressed. It's so completely non-standard, but it looks like a ton of fun to play on.
The third looks maybe a bit too easy to defend, which is really hard to deal with in a couple of matchups. Maybe remove that hop-up and widen the low-ground path instead? Just an idea.
Anyways, interesting idea and good execution.
I was already thinking about that. I widened the entrance to the third/natural area.
|
United Kingdom12032 Posts
The only thing I really can say I dislike about this map is the idea of being blink all in'd on this map as mech scares me quite a lot.
|
I really like what you have achieved with the tileset. Looks cool.
|
United States10380 Posts
6 islands. you know what that means? 6 CC before rax.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On April 28 2013 00:14 FlaShFTW wrote:
6 islands. you know what that means? 6 CC before rax.
sure, if flash plays on it
I like the 3 easy bases -> island hop layout
|
On April 27 2013 19:14 Qikz wrote:
The only thing I really can say I dislike about this map is the idea of being blink all in'd on this map as mech scares me quite a lot.
Blink all in is definitely a concern. If a decent Protoss player wants to test it with me that would be great. My current feeling is that the best analog for this first three base setup is Antiga Shipyard. Antiga was in competitive play for a long time and although it had many issues I don't remember blink all-ins being broken. Since this is hots though who knows.
|
On April 27 2013 14:20 KingCorwin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 00:03 TheFish7 wrote:
I think you do quite a good job of encouraging air play without making ground armies unusable or disallowing "ground-based" strategies. Terran being strong might be a valid criticism but its hard to say for sure since there are pretty much 0 island maps out there. Nice! Also +1 for BW style of map description.
I agree. I actually forgot about this but I liked how BW maps had a map description that revealed some story or something regarding the map.
I haven't checked but most of the official SC2 maps do not have this anymore sadly  (unlike BW maps where nearly every single map by Blizzard had it, which was neat).
|
On April 27 2013 14:20 KingCorwin wrote:
Also +1 for BW style of map description.
Cool points to whomever can tell me why I chose the name Monty.
|
I don't know about balance, but it looks really fun. The 4th seems like a nightmare to take.
|
Really, really good map. All maps should have the concept of easy fast 3 bases but then map control is needed for more bases. That way most skill is needed to actually win games. In my opinion the ladder maps at the moment are a no go and should be replaced with maps like these. +1
Ps: can i find this in the custom games section?
|
On April 29 2013 23:31 MarcusRife wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 14:20 KingCorwin wrote:
Also +1 for BW style of map description. Cool points to whomever can tell me why I chose the name Monty.
Based on the KeSPA BW map Monty Hall?
|
Very good work, its my favorite map of yours. My suggestion would be to consider and mess around with connecting the middle to the outer paths via a small pathway or ramp to highground. The map just feels huge for a 2p map and the paths are very small/disconnected, so connecting the middle to outer paths between the middle expos may be an improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Vf613uz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xnIpdts.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/d1ErTrh.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RfKxNRV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wmXMCaq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WdSvWOi.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ILhn0lW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/W3h4n4n.jpg)
