• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:54
CEST 05:54
KST 12:54
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202552RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams9Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 594 users

[M] (2) AVEX - Windwaker

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Avexyli
Profile Blog Joined April 2014
United States694 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-02 05:01:05
February 02 2017 05:00 GMT
#1
[M] (2) AVEX - Windwaker

[image loading]

[image loading]
(click to enlarge)

Size: 152x156
Tileset: Elsecaro, Shakuras City
Spawn Positions: 11, 5
Base Count: 16
Servers: NA, EU

Link to Reddit Discussion.

Features/Explanation/Whatever:
+ Show Spoiler +

This honestly was a map that was produced rather quickly after I noticed the new Meinhoff textures that were updated with 3.10. Just decided to make a standardish map, where two key bases would slow down mineral efficient unit compositions. I'm not sure if I'm too happy with those bases being lower mineral counts, but I feel it counteracts the jumpstart at the beginning with an extra mineral patch in the main. The goal was to create a midgame that approaches quicker than normal, but it's a bit harder to push out of that midgame even with expansions. If it's too much, I can easily reset the bases to a normal 8/2.


Artsy / Detailed Pictures:
+ Show Spoiler +


[image loading]

[image loading]

[image loading]

[image loading]

[image loading]






[image loading]



AVEX - Multi Winner, Finalist, Judge of the TeamLiquid Map Contests, Currently assisting developing StarCraft: Evolution Complete as Environment Artist & Multiplayer Game Design and Balancing.
ZigguratOfUr
Profile Blog Joined April 2012
Iraq16955 Posts
February 02 2017 05:22 GMT
#2
It's a nice standard map, but I'm not sure the mineral shenanigans are suited for this map. The 5th and 6th bases are already noticeably more disconnected than the third and fourth, so reducing their mineral count makes expansions that are already slightly undesirable even more undesirable.

My feeling is that atypical resource counts should be used to give interesting choices to the player. For example on Atlantis Spaceship it was the easily harassable third that had the extra geyser, while the normal third was easier to defend. On this map all it does is make the choice of fourth easier by disincentivizing those two bases.
SidianTheBard
Profile Joined October 2010
United States2474 Posts
February 02 2017 13:51 GMT
#3
Another pretty awesome map Avex, good job! I think my biggest problems with it are the different mineral counts & the expansion pattern choice.

Regarding Mineral Counts:

I think the main base NEEDS to have 8m2g no matter what. Otherwise you get oneindividual map that is going to have a ton of different timings, openers, cheeses, etc then every other map and that alone is going to make people veto it. Sure, it's only 1 extra mineral patch in the main but that means getting those reapers a few seconds earlier, getting that oracles faster, getting that all-in faster. With the LoTV economy the early game is already fast enough that I see no reason to try to accelerate that at all.
I honestly don't see the point of making tough to hold bases with less minerals. If you want to have an inbase natural or a super easy to hold 3rd, then sure that makes sense to me to limit the mineral count. But when you can get end game with 3 base economy, having all your choices of 4ths be less minerals...what's the point of ever going past 3 base then? You're basically saying if you expand past a 3rd you're going to be punished.

Expansion Pattern:

Assuming the southeast main base, why would you ever expand north? Main/Nat, take the 3rd that hugs your main, then take the base at 6oclick, followed by the pocket base just north of that. They are all much easier to defend, would protect you better against drops and overall just seem closer to your other bases and further for the enemy. Think if you expand north for your 3rd, you're then most logical choice is the one just north of that but then not only are there less minerals (see above point) but that mineral line is sooooo easily harassable with it being right on the edge. I believe you either need to make that northern expansion path more easily attainable so people can choose either way depending on their playstyle or maybe just cut off the northern part completely and redesign it a bit, basically forcing players to expand one way but then if you redesign that side of the map maybe you could add more paths / flow to the map.

___

Overall, I do like the map quite a bit though, again assuming the southeast main base, I like the expansion pattern if you expand clockwise. The attack paths in the middle are interesting and for the most part the expansion placement is solid.
Textures/Aesethtics you always do a fantastic job, so once again A+ work on that. I like the beach style you did with the somewhat Blotchy grass sprinkled in, makes it look pretty nice. I wonder if you also used some type of...I believe it's Tarsonis Grass? (The yellowish grass) so you could blend it even better. I don't know how it would look, maybe it'll look like ass but I'm just thinking in my head right now so can't open the editor and see how it'd actually look.
I also absolutely love the water over the sand part or where you use the height/smoothing tool on the edges to far a nice smooth transition to deeper waters. To be fair though, the water in the middle will probably get removed because doesn't the terrain still bug out randomly if you ever build anything on it? Unless that was fixed, it's been awhile.
___
Great work Avex!

Creator of Abyssal Reef, Ascension to Aiur, Battle on the Boardwalk, Habitation Station, Honorgrounds, IPL Darkness Falls, King's Cove, Korhal Carnage Knockout & Moonlight Madness.
Adelull
Profile Joined May 2016
39 Posts
February 02 2017 14:03 GMT
#4
I'm not a mapmaker but I've been in master league for a few years at least and I'm interested in seeing how the different mineral counts can play out more before deciding that it doesn't work.
Ej_
Profile Blog Joined January 2013
47656 Posts
February 02 2017 15:10 GMT
#5
On February 02 2017 23:03 Adelull wrote:
I'm not a mapmaker but I've been in master league for a few years at least and I'm interested in seeing how the different mineral counts can play out more before deciding that it doesn't work.

Unfortunately, Blizzard has made it a rule that all maps that ever want to make it to the ladder, are pretty much required to have 8min2gas on every base (but golds, with 6min patches)
"Technically the dictionary has zero authority on the meaning or words" - Rodya
Phaenoman
Profile Joined February 2013
568 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-02 16:00:38
February 02 2017 15:59 GMT
#6
On February 03 2017 00:10 Ej_ wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2017 23:03 Adelull wrote:
I'm not a mapmaker but I've been in master league for a few years at least and I'm interested in seeing how the different mineral counts can play out more before deciding that it doesn't work.

Unfortunately, Blizzard has made it a rule that all maps that ever want to make it to the ladder, are pretty much required to have 8min2gas on every base (but golds, with 6min patches)

I am pretty sure AVEX did those mineral adjustments taking into account that Blizzard is willing to break those rules you describe in favor of more freedom for mapmakers. I think they announced it at Blizzcon? Definitly not too long ago.
Random is hard work dude...
Avexyli
Profile Blog Joined April 2014
United States694 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-02 20:07:27
February 02 2017 20:07 GMT
#7
On February 03 2017 00:59 Phaenoman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 03 2017 00:10 Ej_ wrote:
On February 02 2017 23:03 Adelull wrote:
I'm not a mapmaker but I've been in master league for a few years at least and I'm interested in seeing how the different mineral counts can play out more before deciding that it doesn't work.

Unfortunately, Blizzard has made it a rule that all maps that ever want to make it to the ladder, are pretty much required to have 8min2gas on every base (but golds, with 6min patches)

I am pretty sure AVEX did those mineral adjustments taking into account that Blizzard is willing to break those rules you describe in favor of more freedom for mapmakers. I think they announced it at Blizzcon? Definitly not too long ago.


Aye, upcoming TLMC will not have mineral count restrictions.

Everything Sidian + Zigg Said:


I think the 9/2 will definitely have an effect on the early game, yes. But, also consider that almost all other builds will be slightly faster as well, such as the slightly faster reaper. Keep in mind that's also one extra patch for zergling income, or a slightly faster adept, msc, etc. While I do think it will accelerate the strategies, I don't know if it will have as much as an effect as 10/2 would.

Regarding expansion patterns - I spoke with a couple of players shortly before posting to TL/Twitter/Reddit about the decisions one would make in varying matchups. I believe that the vertical (north/south) third base options would be recommended in non-Terran based matchups. For example, I would expect that base to be taken by a Protoss player in PvZ. It's pulled back into a corner, and is much less open to the surrounding region. In the case of PvZ, I feel as if that base were easily defended, the other third would be a decent option to become the new fourth, assuming a regular game where the protoss army is strong enough to hold a more open base. In terran-based matchups, I would not expect the northern base to be taken, due to the obvious strength of tank and liberator pushes, however, the distance for creep to travel is shorter to that base, so it's possible it would be taken for the sake of reinforcement (and all Zergs I know would break down the rocks there, which was placed purely to avoid tank abuse). I also like the tradeoff with both choices of expansions. Should you expand vertically, your third is tucked back in, and easier to wall, whereas your fourth is exposed. If you expand horizontally, your third is exposed and more difficult to hold, but your fourth is more fortified. That's the idea, anyway.

Regarding the aesthetics - The grass is a mix of Elsecaro and Bel'Shir BushEx2. Tarsonis' new yellow grass is really dark in bright lighting, so it'd look muddy and miss the mark unfortunately. As for the water, I could just make it unbuildable in pathing ;P
AVEX - Multi Winner, Finalist, Judge of the TeamLiquid Map Contests, Currently assisting developing StarCraft: Evolution Complete as Environment Artist & Multiplayer Game Design and Balancing.
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-03 06:37:45
February 03 2017 06:33 GMT
#8
Agree w/ sidian on the main base probably needing to be 8m2g on all maps, good reasoning there.

I think maybe the more interesting idea is a nat that has less minerals on its patches (say, instead of 4 900s and 4 1500s you had all 900s or even 750s) in combination with normal or even highly defensible 4ths. That way your early game isn't affected at all, you can still max out on 3 base, but it creates an interesting strategic dilemma where if you put everything into your attack with your big army without holding a little back for expanding behind it and defending counterattacks, then you might be screwed bc your main and nat will both be mining out soon. Whereas right now you can max, fight, and then just keep making units on 3 base. There's not enough risk in it. This new way there would be this real choice of whether to use your maxed army to tightly secure your 4th and/or 5th, or go balls-deep on the attack. This would effectively increase the defender's advantage.

Or maybe not, idk. There's a good idea in there somewhere

edit: btw, rude of me, the map is good. Nice aesthetics as always and solid layout.
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
blunderfulguy
Profile Blog Joined April 2016
United States1415 Posts
February 07 2017 01:07 GMT
#9
Oh, this isn't a 1v1 Legend of Zelda map? Disappointed! Looks good though.
Blunder Man doing everything thing a blunder can.
Caerwyn
Profile Joined February 2017
23 Posts
February 21 2017 13:19 GMT
#10
Hey I'm not sure how helpful it is, but I absolutely love this map :D also I have a few mid-high dia replays on this map if you need any. Nice work Avex ! :D
Antares777
Profile Joined June 2010
United States1971 Posts
February 21 2017 18:30 GMT
#11
This map is a very solid macro map and fairly standard layout. I hope the altered minerals work out. I'm rather indifferent whether or not the main has 8 or 9 minerals. I'm more worried about the low mineral expansions on the map.

On February 02 2017 22:51 SidianTheBard wrote:
I honestly don't see the point of making tough to hold bases with less minerals. If you want to have an inbase natural or a super easy to hold 3rd, then sure that makes sense to me to limit the mineral count. But when you can get end game with 3 base economy, having all your choices of 4ths be less minerals...what's the point of ever going past 3 base then? You're basically saying if you expand past a 3rd you're going to be punished.


I strongly agree with this. Low resource bases should have some element of risk vs reward. If it has less resources, make it easier to defend. If it has more resources, make it harder to defend. Having later game expansions with lower resource counts just discourages expansion.

Great job!
Zweck
Profile Joined February 2015
Germany211 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-22 21:24:12
February 22 2017 21:22 GMT
#12
Looks like a nice map but on 2nd tought, theres a big problem the layout has in my opinion. You can basically move from everywhere to everywhere all the time. Theres ramps just everywhere, where no mineral lines are preventing them to be. Its kinda works as a macro map, altough its offers strategic boringness. When you see the opponent somewhere, you can basically walk there in a straigt line, no air space, no rocks, no special terrain wall or sth
https://www.instagram.com/instazweck/ ____ behance.net/brachert _____ https://zweckthings.tumblr.com/
Antares777
Profile Joined June 2010
United States1971 Posts
February 22 2017 22:22 GMT
#13
On February 23 2017 06:22 Zweck wrote:
boringness


When you have to use this word to describe a map, it means that it's fairly standard and there's not much else to critique. This map is a finalist under the category of macro after all.
Zweck
Profile Joined February 2015
Germany211 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-22 23:09:04
February 22 2017 22:29 GMT
#14
I know its a finalist, does that make it immune to critics? I Mean Avex has some time now, to maybe even improve the map, Its may still be a good macro map, never denied that.. but what i said is true isnt it. But now that i think about it, its a bit the same for vaani or newkirk, and they work well too. But its not what makes a really interesting and good map in my opinion. I made some pics to show what i mean:
I simplified the "walking pattern" of some good standard maps:

dusk towers
[image loading]
king sejong
[image loading]
overgrowth
[image loading]
coda
[image loading]
echo (oops forgot 1 line there..)
[image loading]

and windwaker in comparison:
[image loading]

the walking patterns are everywhere and so evenly distributed, i dont think that makes an "interesting" map tbh

Maybe deleting 1 or 2 ramps and add some rocks maybe somewhere could make it better imo
https://www.instagram.com/instazweck/ ____ behance.net/brachert _____ https://zweckthings.tumblr.com/
Fatam
Profile Joined June 2012
1986 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-23 00:33:20
February 23 2017 00:32 GMT
#15
It's a problem that NewSunshine first put into words best, I think, calling it "homogenous pathing", where basically what direction you go barely matters, the only thing that ends up mattering is distance between bases.

Of course mapmakers are kind of incentivized to use this kind of pathing recently with the rise of positional units like liberators, where if you can't flank/maneuver around them then the game can be quite punishing and "unfun".

So it's a fine line. And I think we all have trouble with this atm. Either you make it too restrictive and certain things are just OP, or it ends up being too boring because you can go everywhere with ease. I also like to say a map has "too much flow" when it gets to that point.

Anyway, I agree that this map in particular could use a couple less ramps to make army positioning/route choices matter a little more.
Search "FTM" in SC2 | Latest Maps: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/528528-2-ftm-siegfried-station http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/525489-2-ftm-crimson-aftermath http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/524737-2-ftm-grime
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 7h 6m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 259
RuFF_SC2 153
Livibee 60
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 886
Sharp 346
HiyA 136
Zeus 125
NaDa 78
Sexy 73
Icarus 6
Britney 0
League of Legends
JimRising 750
Counter-Strike
Coldzera 312
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox538
Other Games
summit1g12015
shahzam865
ViBE238
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 35
Other Games
BasetradeTV14
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 96
• davetesta36
• practicex 26
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Lourlo643
• Stunt330
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
7h 6m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
10h 6m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 6h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 10h
CSO Cup
1d 12h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 14h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.