                  Name Fallen Dreams
                  Version 1.3 (14/1/2014)
                  Bounds 132x164
                  Bases 10 Normal Yield + 2 6m

Aesthetics

+ Show Spoiler [Click for images ] +

Bluejava

Sweden135 Posts

December 29 2013 10:32 GMT

Wow these type of "switch the main base with the natural" kind of maps actually fix a lot of problems:O

Existor

Russian Federation4295 Posts

December 29 2013 10:55 GMT

Woah, those bridges are epic, also really nice work with water and trees on 1st screenshot.

Idea with deadly bridges really adds something new. Is there visual timer on them? Like on the Raynor's bomb from campaign

DARKING

Mexico675 Posts

December 29 2013 11:38 GMT

This.
People should really pay more attention to maps with interesting features. Having the lava map on the Red Bull Battlegrounds was a good start. This, for having the low mains and the bridges, is a map I think deserves notoriety.

Zero idea if the map is actually balanced, but the idea is gold.

Plexa

Aotearoa39261 Posts

December 29 2013 12:04 GMT

Damn lezael you're churning out some really nice maps lately.

InfCereal

Canada1759 Posts

December 29 2013 13:22 GMT

Jesus lezael. You make the most gorgeous maps.

Semmo

Korea (South)627 Posts

December 29 2013 13:36 GMT

Nice map!

iHirO

United Kingdom1381 Posts

December 29 2013 13:56 GMT

Awesome concept! Thirty seconds sounds too fast though and people will probably just avoid bridges.

uh-oh

Hong Kong135 Posts

December 29 2013 14:19 GMT

Every time I see a wide main entrance I immediately think about 4 gates in PvP.

But I love bridges, they give rise to more asymmetrical fights where a smaller force can hold off a larger force advancing on a bridge. They literally force a deathball to split up, lest risk being caught in a bad spot.

Syphon8

Canada298 Posts

January 01 2014 21:21 GMT

#10

This map is entirely unlike anything I've ever seen. It's immaculate. I want to say it's BW-esque, but it really isn't. It's SC2-esque.

skdeimos

Canada155 Posts

January 01 2014 21:34 GMT

#11

On December 29 2013 23:19 uh-oh wrote:
Every time I see a wide main entrance I immediately think about 4 gates in PvP.

But I love bridges, they give rise to more asymmetrical fights where a smaller force can hold off a larger force advancing on a bridge. They literally force a deathball to split up, lest risk being caught in a bad spot.

4gates are rarely held at the ramp these days thanks to the advent of the MSC. I agree about bridges though.

Bswhunter

Australia954 Posts

January 01 2014 23:45 GMT

#12

I love this map and its gimmick, but I think it might punish players a little too much.
Maybe you could just make it push units to whichever side of the bridge they are closest to? Make it like a 30 second forcefield comes up every minute or so. This would still make bridges really important, but it would avoid that one instance where a player is moving 50 supply worth of units over a bridge just to see them explode.

(Also if you could put some sort of effect leading up to the bridge changing, like a series of lights going on/off, that would be great)

IeZaeL

Italy991 Posts

January 04 2014 14:00 GMT

#13

Big news guys. Unfortunately the bridge system crashed at some point , so SigmaFiE had to remake it. I would also thank ScorpSCII for his work. Didnt know you made the layout of the map.

The map should be compatible with any version of gameheart. Go test it on EU !

[image loading]

P.S Png is such a low quality stuff to work with

IeZaeL

Italy991 Posts

January 08 2014 16:33 GMT

#14

Decided i really had to make something about the random shit with bridges.

- Changed bridges timer to 30 seconds to 5 minutes.
- Added visual indicator before a bridge effectively retracts. For clarity , map-pings , warning sounds and a timer.
- Added some big led lightings flashing before a bridge retracts.

Hope this will help a lot of the problems ive found during test games.

Samro225am

Germany982 Posts

January 08 2014 22:25 GMT

#15

this looks sweet. great work @ all the co-authors!

skdeimos

Canada155 Posts

January 08 2014 22:55 GMT

#16

One thing I'm kinda worried about is the fact that the attacker has a much shorter distance to bounce between the nat backdoor and main choke than the defender does. Not sure how, for example, Terran can deal with early ling/bane strategies if they have to keep multiple filled bunkers at two far locations.

MarcusRife

343 Posts

January 08 2014 23:28 GMT

#17

30 seconds to 5 minutes? That really ruins the map imo. I think the 30 seconds was fine. It makes the bridges interesting. If I approach a bridge with my army and it is extended but I don't know for how long I will be wary to cross it. I now have options go around. Wait for it to cycle so that I can see it extend so I know I have 30 more seconds. So I decide to wait. While I wait my opponent notices that I am waiting to cross and he moves to defend but I don't realize this I go to cross when it extends again but find that my way he blocked by my opponents army. I need to retreat quickly or lose my army on the bridge. 30 seconds is great because it forces players to pay attention to the bridges if they want to cross. It is also good because if I lose track I don't have to wait long for it to cycle.

There is no reason to use the map if the timer is set at 5 minutes.

Also skdeimos is right the natural choke and main choke distance is problematic for the defender. Lefix had the same problem on his remake of Electric Circuit.

I beg you to change it back to 30 seconds.

monitor

United States2409 Posts

January 09 2014 07:19 GMT

#18

Why no gas in the corners? Seems like it might be useful for Zerg. But then again I haven't been watching the game at all for months.

SigmaFiE

United States333 Posts

January 09 2014 15:00 GMT

#19

I tried reeeeeeaaally hard to keep quiet. :/

You should change the bridge timers down to more acceptable times. Here's why.

The reason 30 seconds was initially chosen had 3 points particular to it:
1) It forces players to have increased army position awareness and to time their attacks/retreats, making constant re-positioning very important.
2) The kill mechanic incorporated into the bridges increases the risk of using the bridges (as well as making them easily understood by players as not something to just sit on).
3) 30 seconds per bridge pair is easy to understand if not paying attention to the timers

When Scorp and I originally began this, we had not implemented the visual timer feedback, as you know--you did. By incorporating the visual timer feedback, you are correct in solving point 3. Meaning other time frmaes can be opened up to be used. Here is why you should not increase it too much though: the 30 seconds timer has 5 seconds animation transition between the extend/retract positions (effectively eliminating 5 seconds availability of the bridge to 25 seconds). By having the bridges act in pairs as we designed it along with short availability time frames you encourage players to attack aggressively and constantly position. It increases the tension of the game as your force that has made it across the bridge now has to secure a different retreat path than the one just taken. I suggest at most you increase the timer to 45 seconds and leave them acting in pairs, resulting in an effective 40 seconds availability per bridge pair with the offset still in place to encourage movement on both sides of the bridges (as well as some predictability which lessens the pain of a bridge kill mechanic through unpredictability).

As for the natural/main entrance issue-that is already solved as the defender can place units at both the top of the natural area and the bottom of the main area to defend. Units can walk along those little areas where terrain square holes are missing including some of the larger units like stalkers/marauders/etc. . . It is just a matter of players figuring out how to use it properly.

IeZaeL

Italy991 Posts

January 09 2014 15:11 GMT

#20

Ok , im sorry. I did a mistake

Changed it to 45 seconds , the reason i changed it was mainly for a clarity issue. Having every 30 seconds visual/sound advisor like these was a pain in the ass.

SigmaFiE

United States333 Posts

January 09 2014 16:06 GMT

#21

On January 10 2014 00:11 IeZaeL wrote:
Ok , im sorry. I did a mistake

Changed it to 45 seconds , the reason i changed it was mainly for a clarity issue. Having every 30 seconds visual/sound advisor like these was a pain in the ass.

No need to apologize. From that perspective it makes sense as that would be annoying.

As the bridge operations are cyclical -- you might just ping them the first time they run during the opening ~minute of the game and then the ping trigger does not loop. This co-ordinates with the function of visual timers on the bridges themselves and serves the function of informing the player during the low-stress opening minute(s) and simultaenously frees up the minimap from clutter to give players the more necessary information in the later stages of the game.

MarcusRife

343 Posts

January 09 2014 16:34 GMT

#22

On January 09 2014 16:19 monitor wrote:
Why no gas in the corners? Seems like it might be useful for Zerg. But then again I haven't been watching the game at all for months.

Completely agree. I noticed that as well but failed to mention it. Those bases are of no use to Zerg. They need gas at that stage in the game not minerals.

Normal

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh