EPTSC2 map feedback - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Clearout
Norway1060 Posts
| ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
| ||
|
zeidrichthorene
Canada83 Posts
I can't imagine doing anything on this map ZvT except teching to mutalisks and hoping I can wipe you out before you can get a reasonable ground force that can take advantage of the map features. T and P would have some fun on here though, lots of toys for them. Zerg just doesn't have any units that can take much advantage of all the highground and chokes. | ||
|
Jyvblamo
Canada13788 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:33 FabledIntegral wrote: What? That's completely irrelevant if they are clumped up. It still doesn't allow for flanking if your zerglings have to run BY the enemy army, taking fire, to get to the other side... it funnels the units into ball vs ball attacks. There are flanking paths, they're just very narrow. The only parts of the map where you arguably can't flank is the middle and the back cliffs. | ||
Chill
Calgary25988 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Chill/chillthon.png) | ||
|
Jyvblamo
Canada13788 Posts
| ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
| ||
|
Equaoh
Canada427 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:55 Chill wrote: + Show Spoiler + i think this map is gunna be huge i just designed it LOL As for the OPs map, 6 gas zerg --> mutas? bases look haraaaaassable | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:55 Chill wrote: i think this map is gunna be huge i just designed it idk if it's just coincidence but the middle of your map kind of resembles a snake. Iff you havent given any thought to a name yet maybe you could call it something like VIPER or COBRA | ||
|
Dionyseus
United States2068 Posts
| ||
|
Chill
Calgary25988 Posts
On April 22 2010 01:02 floor exercise wrote: idk if it's just coincidence but the middle of your map kind of resembles a snake. Iff you havent given any thought to a name yet maybe you could call it something like VIPER or COBRA yea im gunna make one big destructible rock in a snake shape | ||
|
nixi
Sweden39 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:08 Kralic wrote: Looks a bit Terran favoured with cliffs behind the main base mineral lines? Other than that neat concept. Yeah, maybe I should add a ramp so that the player can get access to those cliffs by walking around somehow. I will think about that. On April 22 2010 00:10 Whiplash wrote: Wow looking at this map made me realize how different the maps can be from sc1. This looks like a lot of fun and want to try it out. I think that your back natural shouldn't be able to be hit by short-medium ranged units though unless the rock is destroyed (maybe put it on the ramp). edit- pm me after you make the map once galaxy editor comes out if you want someone to help test it (i'm a pretty good player). Good suggestion about the medium ranged units. I will keep that in mind when making it. On April 22 2010 00:13 Jyvblamo wrote: Ouch, wouldn't want to play this map as Zerg. D: The main and primary 2 expos are harassable by tank/thor drops and vikings. Even Kulas Ravine wasn't so cruel D: Neat work though, it's got my mind salivating for all the kinds of maps there will be... Actually, I'm a zerg player myself and I like when there are alot of options regarding drops on cliffs and such. Sure its in favor of terran but mutalisks could prevent it and zerg does have the ability to drop aswell. Regarding the natural cliff, it can be reached from ground if you destroy the rocks. On April 22 2010 00:14 Yaqui wrote: Cool map design. My comment regards the center of the map, with the two semi-circle high grounds. To me, it seems like there's too many ramps leading to the high grounds, maybe remove the large one in the middle? Also, what did you use to make this sketch cause it's symmetry is pretty legit. I used photoshop and mirrored. About the center I get what you mean. However I might increase the size and space in that area to make it a little bit less choky. I'll think about removing the big ramps then, but as it looks now you are right  On April 22 2010 00:16 TxtbookNinja wrote: Looks actually really cool IMO... cliffs make me nervous though behind the minerals, Ide feel that drops would be all that would happen on this map. Also Im not sure I understand the need for the destructables closest to the mains. Other than that, I like it. :D Thanks The rocks in the main gives you access to your natural's cliff. On April 22 2010 00:17 Jyvblamo wrote: An idea you could consider is reversing the high-grounds and low-grounds around the mains (ie; make the naturals high-ground and the cliffs surrounding them low-ground). That is a good idea, I will keep it in mind if drops becomes too strong. On April 22 2010 00:18 Djzapz wrote: I think it's too easy to harass the inside natural with the back passage, the destructible rock should be on the ramp to prevent that imo. I see what you mean but I placed it there because I wanted reapers/colos have two different angles to chose from. Maybe if medium ranged units wont reach the mineral line as whiplash suggested it will be okay. On April 22 2010 00:18 Zexion wrote: Looks pretty nice, but I agree with the first poster that it's a bit Terran favoured, at least in early game for reapers. It might work well for Protoss as well with their Collosi but for Zerg this is a nightmare. But that's just my opinion. Maybe we need to test the map before making conclusions. So I say try making this map (with eventual changes that you see fit) and let us know so we can play and see for ourselves Btw, what is the reason to the destructable rocks not being on the ramps at the passage to the main bases? The reason for the rock to be placed there is so that zerg can gain access to that cliff without having to make air units/drop. I will let everyone who wants to test this map to play it, I would be happy to As for you who thinks its too closed off: If thats the case I will open it up and make some more space. As it looks now I think I agree with you. I think I will make it so that it takes atleast two forcefields to shut off the main ramp, but only one to seal the "bridge". Thanks everyone I'm really happy to receive so much feedback so quickly. As soon as the editor is released I'll make sure all of you get to kill eachother on it. | ||
|
Sfydjklm
United States9218 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote: Armies in SC2 are much more clumped up and don't suffer as much from narrow spaces, compared to SC1. I'm in favor of seeing tighter maps. Though, sentry abuse will be a pain. A toss with ~20 sentries could permanently force-field off his side of the map haha =P zerg suffers from tighter chokes way more in sc2 then in sc1, mainly because there is no lurker to deal aoe dmg. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:33 Wr3k wrote: It looks like one giant choke point. this was my first impression as well | ||
|
zealing
Canada806 Posts
i dont really get why some of the rocks are placed where they are but i like the overall map design and back doors | ||
|
DragonDefonce
United States790 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5656 Posts
On April 22 2010 00:55 Chill wrote: i think this map is gunna be huge i just designed it IMBA!!! 6 and 9 positions have one extra expo, and where are the NATURALS?  | ||
|
Hammy
France828 Posts
... for team fortress 2. For SC2, it looks like there are too many chokes and the bases are overly harassable by long range units. Also, The destructibles that lead to the back-natural seem oddly close to the main base cliff. Makinng further would give them some offensive purpose. | ||
|
KinosJourney2
Sweden1811 Posts
Also, the open space would make a Sentry nerf non-needed cause there wouldn't be any tight places to abuse FF at. | ||
|
rANDY
United Kingdom748 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i44.tinypic.com/j96n7s.png) | ||
| ||
