|
|
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 07 2016 01:15 deymos wrote:First of all, thank you for making that kind of topic  Macro: Ultarian Mines ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dVRsVzk.jpg) I can see that you tried with this map but I'm not a fan. I'm not getting the main-nat-third setup. Why is the third so safe? Why is the natural so open to backdoors? Seems counter intuitive. The central gold bases are not good, they're winmore bases not things you take to gain a tactical edge (these are the worst uses of gold bases). Bottom right/top left feel pretty disjointed from the rest of the map. There also isn't a clear theme from my point of view.
Gold base usage: A Treacherous Paradise (the "pocket" expansion is in front, not back and has some rocks, and it's your choice to take it or maybe leave it and expand towards gold base. Cross sprawns only) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LyBBTsP.jpg) I want to like this map but I think the 4p symmetry gimps your ability to make the map effective. For instance, as Terran I'd imagine they'd take the pocket natural then the close gold (overlooked by the pocket natural) becuase thats a strong defensive position which they have all the tools to defend. Crazy things like CC floats early could also be viable. I think if you keep one set of spawns and delete the other two you can work around the interesting base layout decisions in a stronger way. Definitely potential here.
"Cool map": Ashes of War (horizontal symmentry with rocks usage which can make rush distance very short at late game, there are lot of choices to expand - more risky and safer, but without gold base benefits. And there is open path to your backdoor, but rush distance into it is very long) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PYw2k2a.jpg) Thanks for your opinion  The previous map was more of a cool map imo the map has some proportion issues -- it feels like there are large expanses of plain land in some parts and then there's that awkward bridge between the natural close to the gold I get the concept which is good, but I don't think it's been executed as well as it could have been.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 07 2016 04:36 TheSkunk wrote:I know you gave an opinion of Phaeton Oasis already, but not the others, and I've made changes to all of them. Thanks! Spear of Adun: + Show Spoiler + Are all spawns enabled? If so, if you drawn a line from top left to bottom right then spawning on the same side of that line looks really unfun. Way too many corridors for a good game to happen. Cross map seems okay, but I'm concerned there might be some proportion issues around the center of the ship which limits the strength of the map. It's a cute concept though. Probably needs more polish before it'll be a contender (polishing mostly around the proportions of the map).
Unfortunately just kinda bland. The kind of map I feel like I've seen hundreds of times before; and has some awkwardness in the bottom left/top right.
The rocks make this map more interesting which is good. Again I have concerns about the XNT gimmick (I question how successful it will be in LotV). Not sure why there's a second XNT in the third though? Not sure what that is adding to the map. The two central blue bases are win more bases, so don't expect them to have any strategic value. I wish the path behind the third extended behind the mineral line so that it opened up possibilities for the opponent to harass. Right now I'm not sure what value they offer (the rocks may as well be deleted at the moment). Probably the strongest map of the three, still needs refinement.
|
your Country52797 Posts
On May 07 2016 18:50 Plexa wrote:This looks like a teamplay map? You should show start positions; otherwise its hard for judges to read the map overview quickly which pisses them off. According to the map thread it is actually a 1v1 map.
|
On May 07 2016 18:50 Plexa wrote:This looks like a teamplay map? You should show start positions; otherwise its hard for judges to read the map overview quickly which pisses them off. This map is huge. (I'm assuming start positions are the corners). I like the restricted space in the main - you could take this a step further and decrease it even further (like Forte from BW). That could make the unique twist of the map more obvious and maybe even making the map more interesting. The islands are a little questionable; they just seem to fill up space rather than be useful, but I don't see anything else you can do with that space so mayaswell leave them. I think horizontal and cross spawn are the most interesting spawn locations, vertical spawn feels a little awkward. I don't know where the spawn locations are  bottom right/top left? If so, then this is a complex map that has me interested. Probably going to be a balancing nightmare but could be a very interesting map to see get game time to help the communtiy understand the limits of mapping. I like it. I have no idea where the spawn locations are  top left/bottom right would be my guess. Again your doing really experimental things with your first few bases which is pretty cool. If my spawn location guess is right, then I don't think you need the rocks in bottom left/top right. The map would be better with those gone to make the late game more dynamic. Not a fan of the central gold bases on this map since they strike me as 'win more' bases rather than something you'd take to gain an advantage. The map would be good without them imo. Another good map, but I prefer the previous one to this one if you're deciding between them (I like them both more than the macro map). I really want to like this map, but I think the concept needs more refinement. I wish the side paths were more important throughout all phases of the game. Right now they're only useful sometimes (mostly the enemy using them to drop). There's so much potential with this concept then I think you can do more to make them more impactful. I would think really hard about changing the bottom right/top left in ways that make the side paths more interesting since I think those areas are the weakest on the map. If those corners are improved then this could go very deep into the contest imo. The problem with these kinds of maps is that its so annoying to move between each side of the map. That means these maps tends to end up more frustrating than fun to play on. Of the maps you've posed this one is by far the weakest. I like what you've tried to do here (safe blues, dangerous golds) but there are better ways to execute this concept,
First map is 1v1 map with 2 back door expansions
|
On May 07 2016 15:23 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 11:32 Avexyli wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YnsStfn.png) Macro Map. Subcategory would be the gold one, as the gold is close by and defendable as a natural, but punishable. 144x144. ninja edit: fixed the distance between main and natural, squished the gap of the gold base entrance, added a ramp for the area above the gold. There's a lot of interesting ideas here but I feel like you need to show more restraint because there's so much going on that you have to wonder how much of it is actually necessary/beneficial to the map. So for instance, the high ground in the main doesn't seem to serve a useful purpose (I can only think it's useful to hide a drop; LOS blockers ala early WOL era maps could achieve the same thing in a less radical way). I'd remove those. The high ground XNT seem to only be usable by Terran, and provide questionable benefit in any eventuality (best case scenario; tanks holding that position but that's pretty unlikely IMO) Next you have features that are in tension. I really like the destrucible rocks that need to be broken to reveal an exposed mineral line but let's think about that feature in the context of the map. The gold base is almost always going to be as a first or second expansion, meaning you're likely to have buildings/units in that area controlling the vulnerable side of the mineral line. That base might be taken then as a 4th or 5th base (more likely 5th since the high ground base near the gold is so safe) which means that destructible rock-vulnerable mineral line feature isn't really contributing much. If I were you, I'd push for a gold base = risky base, blue base = safe base theme (which also helps to increase the validity of it being a gold base map). A starting point for this idea would be something like + Show Spoiler +And then you can iterate upon that until you are satisfied. You don't have to go this way obviously, but it really makes the theme of the map clear and removes the unnecessary features leading to a better experience.
I actually quite like your suggestions, so this is what it looks like now:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tppn1PL.png)
EDIT: Here's a new map too:
144x144. Just a macro map.
|
Hey Plexa,
Saw your post for reviews so I might as well get some feedbacks. I'm most likely only going to submit the first one - still have a ton of clean up to do and getting slammed with school, work, and exams as it is finals week. I may or may not finish it and the second map is my back up. Polt, Violet, many teammates, and friends already gave their feedback and I'm in the process of shrinking the main base and cleaning up the artwork so my main concern is not technically balance, but rather if people like you who would judge or rate the map for the contest would like it and if it's good enough for the map pool and GSL.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nnnpS2C.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Q1K1H0O.jpg)
Thanks for the review, Kin (Ryuuga) H. Wong
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 07 2016 22:24 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 18:50 Plexa wrote:On May 07 2016 00:39 Enekh wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ul2jFCa.jpg) This looks like a teamplay map? You should show start positions; otherwise its hard for judges to read the map overview quickly which pisses them off. According to the map thread it is actually a 1v1 map. In that case I have concerns over the bases being too easily defended. If you're giving a player two free bases to take I think you can afford to make the main ramp much more difficult to hold. So for instance, making the 1x1 ramps into 2x2 ramps.
On May 08 2016 04:10 Avexyli wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 15:23 Plexa wrote:On May 07 2016 11:32 Avexyli wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YnsStfn.png) Macro Map. Subcategory would be the gold one, as the gold is close by and defendable as a natural, but punishable. 144x144. ninja edit: fixed the distance between main and natural, squished the gap of the gold base entrance, added a ramp for the area above the gold. There's a lot of interesting ideas here but I feel like you need to show more restraint because there's so much going on that you have to wonder how much of it is actually necessary/beneficial to the map. So for instance, the high ground in the main doesn't seem to serve a useful purpose (I can only think it's useful to hide a drop; LOS blockers ala early WOL era maps could achieve the same thing in a less radical way). I'd remove those. The high ground XNT seem to only be usable by Terran, and provide questionable benefit in any eventuality (best case scenario; tanks holding that position but that's pretty unlikely IMO) Next you have features that are in tension. I really like the destrucible rocks that need to be broken to reveal an exposed mineral line but let's think about that feature in the context of the map. The gold base is almost always going to be as a first or second expansion, meaning you're likely to have buildings/units in that area controlling the vulnerable side of the mineral line. That base might be taken then as a 4th or 5th base (more likely 5th since the high ground base near the gold is so safe) which means that destructible rock-vulnerable mineral line feature isn't really contributing much. If I were you, I'd push for a gold base = risky base, blue base = safe base theme (which also helps to increase the validity of it being a gold base map). A starting point for this idea would be something like + Show Spoiler +And then you can iterate upon that until you are satisfied. You don't have to go this way obviously, but it really makes the theme of the map clear and removes the unnecessary features leading to a better experience. I actually quite like your suggestions, so this is what it looks like now: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tppn1PL.png) Yeah that's looking better. Still probably needs to be worked on to make sure the gold bases are not always the right choice (I think they might be in all cases except natural-third choice right now). But I like this a lot more than the first version.
EDIT: Here's a new map too: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VbcRVhk.png) 144x144. Just a macro map. Looks solid. My concerns would be about the gold mineral wall near the natural. Can that be mined from the natural side efficiently? I think there's likely to be a lot of awkwardness around that area so maybe some test games would be really beneficial.
On May 08 2016 06:43 Kinshini wrote:Hey Plexa, Saw your post for reviews so I might as well get some feedbacks. I'm most likely only going to submit the first one - still have a ton of clean up to do and getting slammed with school, work, and exams as it is finals week. I may or may not finish it and the second map is my back up. Polt, Violet, many teammates, and friends already gave their feedback and I'm in the process of shrinking the main base and cleaning up the artwork so my main concern is not technically balance, but rather if people like you who would judge or rate the map for the contest would like it and if it's good enough for the map pool and GSL. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nnnpS2C.jpg) The angled overview + lighing effects make this map too difficult for me to read. I'm going to need a better picture.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Q1K1H0O.jpg) Thanks for the review, Kin (Ryuuga) H. Wong You need to show the start positions because I don't know if this is a 2p map or a 4p map.
|
|
|
Looks solid. My concerns would be about the gold mineral wall near the natural. Can that be mined from the natural side efficiently? I think there's likely to be a lot of awkwardness around that area so maybe some test games would be really beneficial.
Mineable, yes, but not efficiently no. You can't even put your base close enough to mine it, you'd have to put it below the base you're already mining. (and even then it's really awkward).
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kWZUhUU.jpg)
EDIT: Kin can you spoiler all that? It's alot to scroll through. Also anything you printscreen in the editor can be found in your screenshots folder for SC2. Documents/StarCraft II/Screenshots.
|
Russian Federation421 Posts
On May 06 2016 23:51 Superouman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 21:55 Plexa wrote:On May 06 2016 04:05 -NegativeZero- wrote:maps n stuff ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/G9GYUHx.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oW1gCLY.jpg) The Korean scene would fucking love these maps. Amen
OMG Superouman, are you going take part in upcoming TLMC?
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 08 2016 11:12 Avexyli wrote:Show nested quote +Looks solid. My concerns would be about the gold mineral wall near the natural. Can that be mined from the natural side efficiently? I think there's likely to be a lot of awkwardness around that area so maybe some test games would be really beneficial. Mineable, yes, but not efficiently no. You can't even put your base close enough to mine it, you'd have to put it below the base you're already mining. (and even then it's really awkward). ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kWZUhUU.jpg) EDIT: Kin can you spoiler all that? It's alot to scroll through. Also anything you printscreen in the editor can be found in your screenshots folder for SC2. Documents/StarCraft II/Screenshots. Then I don't really get the point of this base. There's not really a safety trade off and it seems more of a lategame convenience to open a path out of the natural. The other gold base makes sense since there's that risk still, this one not so much. Here's my suggestion; make it so that you can place a town hall near the gold base and mine efficiently from the minerals. Put the geysers from the natural as far as you can from the gold minerals so that a player cannot mine them remotely efficiently if they choose to take the gold base.
Now you have an interesting early game choice to make; take the safe natural with gas but less mineral income, or take the risky gold without gas hoping to take another base soon so you can get good gas supply. That's a good decision to have to make and I think it will improve the map.
Also with your other map I meant iterate on that concept until taking the gold base ISNT always the best option (and that it generally is at the moment). That map will be most effective when there is a clear strategic choice to be made between blue and gold minerals that at the moment seems to be made by default (which is always get gold)
|
Are all spawns enabled? If so, if you drawn a line from top left to bottom right then spawning on the same side of that line looks really unfun. Way too many corridors for a good game to happen. Cross map seems okay, but I'm concerned there might be some proportion issues around the center of the ship which limits the strength of the map. It's a cute concept though. Probably needs more polish before it'll be a contender (polishing mostly around the proportions of the map). Sorry, I should have clarified. It's close-by-air only, so as this picture shows you either both spawn at A or both spawn at points B: http://i.imgur.com/SMkBQqX.jpg And the map is built around that.
Not sure why there's a second XNT in the third though? Not sure what that is adding to the map. The two central blue bases are win more bases, so don't expect them to have any strategic value. I wish the path behind the third extended behind the mineral line so that it opened up possibilities for the opponent to harass. Right now I'm not sure what value they offer (the rocks may as well be deleted at the moment). Probably the strongest map of the three, still needs refinement. The XNT at the third covers the pathway between the two so players can tell which direction the enemy is approaching the third from and position their army accordingly, it was added because testing and player feedback said the third was too hard to hold. I'm not sure of its necessity but I thought it worked well with the theme of the map to use that as a means of making the third easier to hold rather than something else.
At the moment I'm not 100% happy with that path. A player can siege tank harass from behind the rocks, so in a way it already does facilitate harass. The path itself is largely used for harassing the possible 4th from the high ground.
|
On May 06 2016 22:11 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2016 05:03 Vilham wrote:So I worked on this map ages ago and have recently updated it. It has a low protected 2nd and rocks blocking the mid route to slow early game rushes. + Show Spoiler + Despite the same-height main this is still a pretty standard map. It's pretty good structually which is good to see, needs a few more bases to be LotV friendly. It's not polished enough for it to seriously compete against some of the other standard map submissions but it looks like a good stepping stone map for your own development and that future maps from you will start being of higher quality. Thanks for the feedback, I wasn't planning to use this one for the contest just wanted to get it up to a more polished form and then move on to the next map.
I have added 2 more expos to be a little more LotV friendly, can't really add more than that without messing with the layout.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZA789Aq.jpg)
|
Hello! I would like your unbiased opinion on our map. Frostwing 110 x 140 spawns 10 & 8 o'clock Xel'Nagas at 3 & 9 o'clock
Map image: + Show Spoiler +
Old version: + Show Spoiler + Thanks
With best regards, Pasketi
EDIT: Something to take into account: I could change the in-nat third to be a gold base and remove the rocks from those far away expansions. Adding rocks to the 3 o'clock Xel'Naga may be a possibility to slow down hidden aggression from the east, but it may not be a problem?
EDIT2: Did some "improvements" on my own. Better?
|
Hello! Here with a WIP of the "new map type" and "gold base" category. Thanks for your comments beforehand.
4 player map with close air positions and interesting risk/reward and different game play for different spawn positions. (i.e. floating to gold base for macro advantage or a quick rax pushes depending on spawn)
The game can either turn into a macro map or an aggressive map depending on where one chooses to expand and where one choose to break the rocks.
+ Show Spoiler +
Here's an drastically changed version of a map you commented on before. Its really different now though. + Show Spoiler +
Also, this is an old map that I made that promotes aggressive play. I just want to know why its crap. + Show Spoiler +
Best regards, BoxedCube
|
|
|
So I have started a new map and wanted some quick feedback to check I am not going totally the wrong direction for LoTV 
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4yqqh4z.jpg)
Sorry just realised only spawn showing in the bottom left. I feel like some areas are a little too easy to hold.
|
|
|
Here's namaste's re-work. + Show Spoiler + Changes to Gojira, dunno if I really like it though. + Show Spoiler +
I was also thinking of doing this, it made the bases feel less cramped but got rid of the importance of the gold wall. + Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|