August Flood is the first map I've finished in over a year. I intend on submitting it to the Map-ximum contest. Looking for any feedback people are willing to offer!

+ Show Spoiler [90 Overview] +

Currently published on the America and Europe servers.

RFDaemoniac

United States544 Posts

August 16 2014 19:48 GMT

I really like how tight the tightest chokes are and how open the big areas on each side and corner are. I'm not sure how much I like the backdoor to the natural. I think it works really well as a backdoor, but later on it feels like it'd be quite awkward with that lower ground fourth. I almost wish it had defensive utility in the late mid game.
EDIT: Maybe moving the rocks a little closer to the high ground of the nat so that you could put some pressure on the units attacking the rocks by holding units back there? I'm not sure... /EDIT

I wonder if the skinny paths around the back of the corner bases will get much use for runbys. I could see them being largely ignored because of just how far away they are.

I appreciate how convoluted moving around the map is. Navigation requires consideration.

Why did you put LOSB on the small bridges? Is that to allow a player to be extra punishing by holding the middle?

IeZaeL

Italy991 Posts

August 16 2014 20:10 GMT

So nice , so good. This is the type of map i would like to do but i cant :/

Pino

1032 Posts

August 16 2014 21:27 GMT

I love the main base on the same height as the natural

algue

France1436 Posts

August 16 2014 23:16 GMT

You should change the name. September flood will be more appropriate if you win the Map-ximum contest

[PkF] Wire

France24237 Posts

August 17 2014 00:39 GMT

I wonder if 4 gates would actually work on this map. It's the only "unusual" feature of this map, which is otherwise very standard but gorgeous too. I wonder if you couldn't put bases on the high grounds close to the xel'nagas too, it was probably a choice from you not to put some there, may I ask why ?

neobowman

Canada3324 Posts

August 17 2014 01:32 GMT

Yayyy, Monitorrr!

The rush distance looks just a tad bit close here, wiith the short distance between nats.

Might want to consider having a centrallish base so that a player can push 'towards' the others with their expansions.

Plexa

Aotearoa39261 Posts

August 17 2014 05:38 GMT

Yeah that main-nat setup is going to cause a ton of problems. Ignoring the obvious destruction of pvp, bunker rushes vs zerg are also likely to be incredibly broken (as bunkers should be able to wall that off). Just increase the height of the main and you have a really solid and interesting map. You already have a lot of good features on the map, no need to introduce another more or less well established broken feature to ruin the rest of the map!

meatpudding

Australia520 Posts

August 17 2014 06:35 GMT

Is the same-level-base feature still established as broken in HotS? I feel like it hasn't been explored as much since the end of WoL.

-NegativeZero-

United States2142 Posts

August 17 2014 07:46 GMT

#10

On August 17 2014 15:35 meatpudding wrote:
Is the same-level-base feature still established as broken in HotS? I feel like it hasn't been explored as much since the end of WoL.

Seems like it would be ok in HotS since P can defend 4 gates with the nexus cannon. Just block the choke with unbuildable rocks to prevent bunker/pylon walls. That being said the main could easily be raised 1 level higher, just to be safe, there's no real reason why a flat choke is advantageous here.

FlaShFTW

United States10252 Posts

August 17 2014 08:29 GMT

#11

map is super cool with all these run arounds and backdoors. i would like a wee bit more space in the 3rd. feels a bit small.

Plexa

Aotearoa39261 Posts

August 17 2014 08:36 GMT

#12

On August 17 2014 15:35 meatpudding wrote:
Is the same-level-base feature still established as broken in HotS? I feel like it hasn't been explored as much since the end of WoL.

We've had testing of it before, but it typically always comes back to balancing not breaking PvP and not breaking TvZ (via bunker rushes). This map probably would be playable PvP, but TvZ early game would be pretty stupid.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

August 17 2014 12:07 GMT

#13

Really nice map.
Just the choke point should be redesigned a little bit, so that it is blockable with 7spaces from the inside and outside. But I find it great that you try to do a same level main-nat setup. I think it combines well with the double-wide ramp at the natural.
Love the long "isolated" middle path with the two highgrounds on each end as well.

InfCereal

Canada1759 Posts

August 17 2014 12:39 GMT

#14

On August 17 2014 16:46 -NegativeZero- wrote:Just block the choke with unbuildable rocks to prevent bunker/pylon walls.

That would be interesting, but wouldn't it break walling off your own choke?

Plexa

Aotearoa39261 Posts

August 17 2014 20:53 GMT

#15

Might be worth narrowing/removing this section [image loading]

Just to add even more strategic importance to the middle ground/high ground

SatedSC2

England3012 Posts

August 18 2014 10:17 GMT

#16

--- Nuked ---

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

August 18 2014 11:00 GMT

#17

On August 18 2014 19:17 SatedSC2 wrote:

Show nested quote +

I've knocked GM players out of tournaments with 4 Gate builds. I almost beat NightEnD with one in the RBBG qualifier the other day. 4 Gate variants still work if the opponent doesn't scout what you're doing in time, and even then it can be difficult to hold with certain openings. All Photon Overcharge does is buy enough time for you to finish your tech building(s) and to get your own Warpgate research finished, but the 4 Gating player will still have a unit advantage once Photon Overcharge ends and so you can still die quite easily unless the tech you've gone for is Dark Templar. A single Immortal or Void Ray isn't going to overcome the ridiculous unit advantage a 4 Gate has. The most reliable way to stop a 4 Gate is and always will be Sentries preventing the opponent from getting up the ramp using Forcefields, and that obviously doesn't work if the opponent can warp-in across the Forcefield.

Not to mention that there are other viable Warpgate rushes such as the 10 Gate 3 Gate or the MVP 3 Gate to worry about.

You obviously have a massive knowledge advantage on that topic, but what I've seen in terms of 3gate attacks (haven't seen 4gate in quite some time) is that the defender usually gives up the ramp for free and retreats into nexus range and the attacker builds an offensive pylon in the main anyways.

Quidios

Sweden74 Posts

August 18 2014 12:19 GMT

#18

Great job! As for the Main Choke, I recommend doing it like I've done on my map (3) Shrouded Harbor

Rest of the gallery.

I have used panel doodads on the ground to indicate the unbuildable area and to make it intuitiv for the players.

I like the backdoor path and the map is a good variation of the "go around the middle"- type of maps.

SatedSC2

England3012 Posts

August 18 2014 12:31 GMT

#19

--- Nuked ---

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

August 18 2014 14:34 GMT

#20

I think the main differences are vision micro in the early game, for which it does make quite a difference. And that you are not wasting height levels just to get a ramp. Like the ledges left and right of the choke could not be created when the main base was already at maximum height.
Also, there are differences in choke length (you can create shorter and longer choke points when not using the standardized ramps as chokes) and alignment (you don't have to do diagonal ramps, but you can use horzontal/vertical chokes).

1 2 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh