EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iDVVCTL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yuW6lVA.jpg)
(2) YeouL Clash of Civilizations // 문명의 충돌
Created by Enekh
Published not yet
Playable 136X168
Starting Point 1, 7
[M] (2) Clash of Civilizations
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Enekh
Korea (South)73 Posts
(2) YeouL Clash of Civilizations // 문명의 충돌 Created by Enekh Published not yet Playable 136X168 Starting Point 1, 7 | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
| ||
|
Enekh
Korea (South)73 Posts
On October 30 2016 10:34 ZigguratOfUr wrote: This map's aesthetics are way too close to Overgrowth's. Being inspired by a map's aesthetics is fine, but in this case the top half of the map and the low ground has literally the same tilesets, doodads, and composition as Overgrowth. That's true. This map's aesthetic is modified Overgrowth. I want to make PvT Crash, and I think overgrowth is perfect Protoss design. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
| ||
|
Ej_
47656 Posts
 | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
On October 31 2016 00:22 Ej_ wrote: in-base natural In conjunction with how easy it looks to hold the normal natural and how oddly difficult it looks to take a fourth, it doesn't seem like the best choice in its current design. I feel that the in-base expansion should be made more vulnerable to harass, perhaps by having its mineral line vulnerable to ranged units from that base across the gap. If the gap was reduced to a thin line, that would create a fun conflict point. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
| ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On October 30 2016 10:34 ZigguratOfUr wrote: This map's aesthetics are way too close to Overgrowth's. Being inspired by a map's aesthetics is fine, but in this case the top half of the map and the low ground has literally the same tilesets, doodads, and composition as Overgrowth. And there is nothing wrong with that. If a map is good it is good. @map: It looks nice aesthetically. I agree with the comments above though, it would be more interesting if the in-base natural was not as guaranteed. | ||
|
iMrising
United States1099 Posts
However, I can see that the natural can be very very susceptible to marine tank pushes vs terran where the tanks siege at the (possible) fourth and drop marines into the nautral. | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
On October 31 2016 04:04 Fatam wrote: 4th doesn't look that hard, am i missing something? I probably should've added the important qualifier that it's easy enough for compositions tightly focused around space control. More mobile but less robust armies would seem to have a comparative disadvantage, which is not something I'm super comfortable with, given the backdoor expansion. | ||
|
Siegetank_Dieter
45 Posts
| ||
| ||
