|
Hi all TL'ers!
I decided to start sketching on a 1v1 map since blizzard is going to let us get our hands on their galaxy editor soon. I wanted to make a map which has many possibilities in harassment aswell in defence and that ofcourse that is fun to play on. Not too simple nor to big or advanced.
Here it is:
+ Show Spoiler +
So what I'm looking for is some feedback and suggestions on how to improve it so far. I know its kind of a rough sketch but I think it enough to show you what I want to make.
The size of the map isnt decided yet but thats not a problem, but I if you have any favorite tileset you want me to use I would be glad to hear which it'll be. Also the map has no name, so get creative 
Some examples of what I've thought of:
High yield in the corners is kinda easy to access but only provides the player with one gas and is a good place for cliffdrops.
The center has some interesting defending and sneaking by options, and if a tank is placed on one of the cliffs, it can reach one of the gas in the natural expansion (looks like it can reach more but I will fix that).
Reapers and coloss can reach the second natural without having to destroy the rocks. From there they can reach the cliff to the natural aswell as getting inside the enemy base. If they decide to make it the other way around they can get inside the base and avoid the choke.
You can reach your own natural cliff by destroying the rocks in your main base That will take some time, however.
The Xel'Naga watchtowers isn't very important early on except if maybe you want to blink to the natural cliff. Later they might be useful when corner expansion is in use.
So, all suggestion and opinions are welcome!
*edit: map sketch updated
+ Show Spoiler +
*edit: version 3
+ Show Spoiler +
*edit: version 4, added spoilers
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Looks a bit Terran favoured with cliffs behind the main base mineral lines? Other than that neat concept.
|
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).
|
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...
|
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.
|
a bit. To much high / low grounds maybe.
|
looks good, you should make it in the lava tileset, since we haven't seen any of those yet
|
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
|
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).
|
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.
|
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?
|
Let's see, every path is a choke. Every expansion I might take is seigeable or collosusable. And P and T get easy to take and defend naturals. Yeah I think I'm going to have to veto this one as zerg because I'm not a masochist.
|
Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 
|
Calgary25975 Posts
Way too closed off for SC2.
|
On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play?
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
|
i'd like to see more open maps in SC2 like python
oh and plz somebody make a perfect copy of destination for SC2 xD
|
It looks like one giant choke point.
|
On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 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
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.
|
On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 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
Honestly maps like kulas ravine are a bitch to play ZvT or ZvP on. This map would be a nightmare for Z.
|
Open it up a little bit for Z and it'll be awesome. Keep it up dude! Want to see more of this stuffz!!!
|
The bottom and top seems to have too much useless space, except for harassing. Maybe you should alter the mains positions and such so that the middle area will open up a bit more. As it seems now it will favor drop play too much, otherwise it will just be "hold the middle and expand everywhere on your side" play which removes alot of intensity from pushing back and forward from each others mains.
|
looks interesting but very technical, which can lead to some imba strats....
|
Yeah, the only thing I can think is I would hate to play as zerg on this map. Chokes everywhere. Highground everywhere. Expansion walled off by destructable rocks. Tanks and Colossus and Reapers and Sentries would have a field day on this map. A ton of easy expand locations that are incredible defended meaning my ability to easily expand is limited. (A terran can take his 2 nats, and only have to defend 1 choke, and then float a CC over to where it's protected by a destructible rock and be on 4 bases, with only 1 choke to defend. If they control the middle with some tanks, you're pretty much immune to any ground force. I mean, the middle choke is a valley with high ground on either side. Zerg has nothing except air that can deal with a situation like that if there's some detection.
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.
|
On April 22 2010 00:33 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote:On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 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 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.
|
Calgary25975 Posts
i think this map is gunna be huge i just designed it
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Chill/chillthon.png)
|
I see you're implementing the radical "no natural expo' design.
|
Looks real confined for some reason. I'd like to see some remakes of some of the better SC maps. :D
|
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
|
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
|
Get rid of the cliffs behind the main base mineral lines.
|
Calgary25975 Posts
On April 22 2010 01:02 floor exercise wrote:Show nested quote +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
yea im gunna make one big destructible rock in a snake shape
|
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.
|
On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 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.
|
On April 22 2010 00:33 Wr3k wrote:
It looks like one giant choke point.
this was my first impression as well
|
wow lol funny how you drew all that....
i dont really get why some of the rocks are placed where they are but i like the overall map design and back doors
|
the ramp that leads from opponents natural to back of your main and 2 naturals might just cause people to simply harass endlessly....
|
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?
|
The OP's map looks absolutely fantastic!!
... 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.
|
I'd say Chill's Python remake would be a much better SC2 map then OPs, sorry.
Also, the open space would make a Sentry nerf non-needed cause there wouldn't be any tight places to abuse FF at.
|
Im not sure what Zerg or Protoss could do if the terran went reapers with just a normal 12 rax and followed the path to behind the z/p main
![[image loading]](http://i44.tinypic.com/j96n7s.png)
|
Awesome looking map! I would remove the ramp/high ground thingies in the center.
If you want somebody to test it, my acc = Fortune.syn
|
I think it would be cool to see a map that changes the dynamics of mining from the norm
Maybe with mineral deposits scattered not in a typical line like on most maps. Perhaps a mineral field with various patches at different distances.
Another couple ideas I have:
-Gas only expansions
-Overall lower mineral counts to force better micro and place more importance on keeping more expensive units alive
It would force different gameplay with different timing on expanding and/or change the nature of expanding completely.
|
Open up the double bridge chokes and eliminate one of the naturals imo!
Great work!
|
On April 22 2010 00:51 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 00:33 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 22 2010 00:21 Jyvblamo wrote:On April 22 2010 00:19 FabledIntegral wrote:Why are all SC2 maps so choke-like, I hate it. Where's an open map that allows for more macro oriented and flanking play? 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 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.
Not really, you have to run all the way around to get to a path. You can't just easily move around to an opponent, you're forced to take narrow chokes to even attempt a surround, making your timing to flank have to be near impeccable and giving other races that like chokes extra security. And you still can't flank from all sides, your units are limited to coming in at two directions as opposed to from any direction. Makes it a lot easier to see a flank coming as well.
|
Its very T sided and closed. The natural has NO entry points which just means free expansion. The 2nd natural only has two very small chokes. Some of the destructable rocks are useless, in fact some of these high points are useless. Theres too many expos and its just....too fancified. I'm not a fan sorry.
|
On April 22 2010 01:08 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 01:02 floor exercise wrote: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 yea im gunna make one big destructible rock in a snake shape
Make the eye of this snake like figure a watchtower ;D
|
nice job!!
i found its great!!
|
This map looks like a terran's wet dream for siege tanks.
As a Terran I dig it. As a zerg I would cry in my sleep if I had to play ZvT consistently here.
|
On April 22 2010 05:04 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2010 01:08 Chill wrote:On April 22 2010 01:02 floor exercise wrote: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 yea im gunna make one big destructible rock in a snake shape Make the eye of this snake like figure a watchtower ;D
Maybe the whole snake can be watchtowers!
|
jus at a quick glance, this map jus has too much going (are the areas with 2 grey rectangles, xel naga towers?) way too many natural expos for a 1v1 and a lot of entrances so hard for ppl to put up a optimal defense for a fast expo
this is like a really late game map with all these mineral patches and really hard to defend areas
makes walling off tedious among other things
|
i wanna see someone make ride of valkyries in SC2, it would be so awesome D:
|
Thanks again everyone for your feedback and suggestions!
I listened to what you all had to say and made some modifications to the second iteration, tried to open it up a little bit more but maybe its still to consided, let me hear what you think.
![[image loading]](http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l219/nixi_03/Nixi_starcraft2map1_v02.png)
Better or worse?
|
Looks amazing :D, what did you draw it in?
|
Disclaimer: I don't have beta.
Don't know if this has been mentioned before, but the high yields in the corners doesn't seem to be a trend in the current maps released. Swapping them with the watch tower mineral patch seems to conform more to the blizzard released maps.
That being said I like the use of destructible rocks and backdoors seems like it be a frustrating but strategic map to play.
|
i've changed a bit:
+ Show Spoiler +
this way it is less tankable with less higher ground
edit: spoilered
edit: forgot to fix mineral patch at 6
|
United States7166 Posts
too many narrow areas, just like many of the current maps i really dislike the lack of any wide open areas to allow for better flanking/positioning
|
I think the newer one is a bit better, but the cliff behind the main and backyard expansion are still going to be a pain to deal with for Zerg. (Or any race, but Zerg doesn’t have many good ways to exploit this. Nydus Worm maybe.)
I think putting the rock on the top left/bottom right on the ramp would make it harder for Reapers to be so good. (If you don’t nullify the high ground or ramp all together.) They’d have to take a wacky route through the middle to get to the base, and if they wanted to pop out behind the main base minerals they’d have to go past that rock blocked high ground in between the naturals.
And I’d imagine that the ramp going right into the back of the base might promote extremely defensive play, because it’d be such a risk to leave your own base. Especially if you have a relatively immobile army.
That said, I like the overall feel of the map, save for the advantage it gives to Terran, and to a lesser extent Protoss. (Slightly lesser, storms and colossus would be a pain to deal with I’d think.) And I like that high ground thing in between the backyard expo and the natural.
Not sure how I feel about the constricted middle, I’d say go for it when Galaxy Editor comes out, and if it’s bad then you can fix it up a little. We should do experimentation with maps anyways, to see what happens in theory, and what actually happens in practice.
(Also some line of sight blockers might be nice on the map, since their one of my favorite new features.)
Good luck with the map.
|
On April 22 2010 05:42 G4MR wrote:
Looks amazing :D, what did you draw it in?
Thanks! I made it in photoshop.
On April 22 2010 05:45 fabiano wrote:i've changed a bit: + Show Spoiler +this way it is less tankable with less higher ground edit: spoilered edit: forgot to fix mineral patch at 6
Ah I completely forgot to use visionblockers. I will keep them in mind when making the third iteration. I'm not sure about the placement of them in the middle though, perhaps just changing the arc of it so that it cant see the natural instead. Thanks for the input!
|
I made these maps a few weeks back :D
![[image loading]](http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l169/Onira_2006/ArathiSC2.jpg)
|
i would like to see the destructible rocks in the back of the bases moved to ramp that leads to the center area of the map.
with the destructible rocks where they are now it seems like that one natural is very open to harassment with siege or even upgraded colossus i guess
other than that...its awesome that ure already developing maps/looking for feedback
look forward to seeing this map in its final form when this patch comes out.
|
Just a thought on conventions: you might like to color canyons differently depending on whether you can or can't blink across them (possibly striped to indicate the blink direction, and similarly use different icons for rock-blocked ramps depending on whether there is a place to stand a unit on the ramp without destroying the rocks, and when you make very small platforms or chokes, to indicate their sizes with different icons, indicating what will fit on top of them or block them off.
|
I think I like fabiano changes a lot. tdelamay lol you don't have to make a layout look pretty. Coloring you did for top one actually made it harder to look at.
|
On April 22 2010 06:35 CagedMind wrote:
I think I like fabiano changes a lot. tdelamay lol you don't have to make a layout look pretty. Coloring you did for top one actually made it harder to look at.
Yeah, I won't use brushes with blurry edges the next time *sad face*
I like the OP's map. They are easy on the eye.
On the first map though, why is there a destructable rock on that cliff seperating the two expos? It's the sort of rock that helps the attacker more than the defender.
|
If you don't have beta do you mind if other people attempt to create the map once the editor is released? I want to learn how to use the editor/scripting ASAP but I don't currently have any map ideas of my own.
|
the updated one is looking really good, i just have 1 suggestion
On April 22 2010 06:25 smore wrote:
i would like to see the destructible rocks in the back of the bases moved to ramp that leads to the center area of the map.
with the destructible rocks where they are now it seems like that one natural is very open to harassment with siege or even upgraded colossus i guess
|
My only real complaint is the rush distance from nat to nat seems absurdly short.
|
On April 22 2010 06:42 Chrustler wrote:If you don't have beta do you mind if other people attempt to create the map once the editor is released? I want to learn how to use the editor/scripting ASAP but I don't currently have any map ideas of my own.
Hehe thanks but I do have beta and intend to make it myself
On April 22 2010 06:43 [wh]_ForAlways wrote:
My only real complaint is the rush distance from nat to nat seems absurdly short.
You are absolutely right about this. I'll make sure the distance is longer in the next version. I'm thinking slightly longer than on desert oasis.
About the other remarks I've received: Some improvements has been done!
I moved the rock to the ramp as suggested. However, reapers and colos can still reach the expansion but they'll have to go a bit further around. Also I added some vision blockers there so melee units stand a chance in defending those places.
The watchtowers were slightly moved and I added a circle to show their range. As you can see, stalkers can blink up that natural cliff if a xel'naga tower is taken.
I'm thinking about naming the map "Reaper Valley"
![[image loading]](http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l219/nixi_03/Nixi_starcraft2map1_v03.png)
|
Just wanted to say I think it's really interesting that you put the vision blockers on the edges of cliffs like that. I don't think any other map does that and I'm intrigued by how that could affect things. If it works the way I think it might, it would essentially make that cliff "not cliffable" until you have something that provides vision down. It's like a 2 way vision blocker, units can't see up or down. Of course, units might be able to stand "in" it and therefore see down, which might not be what you're looking for.
|
Chills rule of map analysis. Every map looks Terran favored because you can tank everywhere.
I like the work you put into it. It looks interesting, can't wait for these new maps!
|
looks like it'd turn into a huge cheesefest imo
but I do like the layout aside from the cliffs in the back of the main
and it does seem really terran-favoured too..
|
On April 22 2010 08:15 zerglingsfolife wrote:
Chills rule of map analysis. Every map looks Terran favored because you can tank everywhere.
I like the work you put into it. It looks interesting, can't wait for these new maps!
Island maps... WEEEEEE!!!!!
|
I like it, but I feel like the TWO naturals is a bit much. Maybe put the back expansion behind destructible rocks? It just feels a little zerg favored since they can just mass workers and get a huge econ advantage and steamroll quickly.
The expansions by the watch towers are too exposed in my opinion. Either give them protection using cliffs or site blockers.
This is just my two cents. I really like what your doing and am excited to see decent ladder maps!
As a war3 player I can tell you stale map pools suck.
|
Well the latest version looks pretty good, although I have one concern. The expansions at the watch towers seem ridiculously open. By the looks of it, they seem far harder to defend than the high yields, even though the high yields have 2 entry ways.
Perhaps a switch of these would be preferable? I'd reckon a rule-of-thumb would be to always have the hardest defendable expansion be a high yield one, because anything else wouldn't make much sense really.
|
I think the design just gets better and better. My thoughts on this latest one:
I can't see any reason for the vision blockers behind the closed off natural, to me it seems extremely easy to defend anyways. Such an easily defended expansion needs to have some sort of drawback.
Also, I cannot see any reason for the rocks blocking the cliffs between the nats. Honestly, they'll make reaper harass extremely potent and fully prevent fast expanding, since they would be impossible to catch.
If you'd allow me I would love to participate in trying out this map (even though I'm not very good lol).
Feel free to add me, have the same name.identifier ingame as I do here =)
|
On April 22 2010 06:43 [wh]_ForAlways wrote:
My only real complaint is the rush distance from nat to nat seems absurdly short.
Not any shorter than Steppes and 3v6, 9v12 positions on Metal/LT.
|
I really love this design. It makes two central arenas unique to the current maps. I have a slight issue with the high ground behind the mains. It seems too abusable. The natural high high grounds seem O.K. Adds some tension to expanding.
Overall, thumbs up. Keep up the good work! Keep being creative.
|
Starting to look better and better. I think it still needs wider areas though, and perhaps more strategically placement LoS blockers in the center.
Also, the yellow shouldn't be in the corner imo. They should be next to the Xel'Naga and placed slightly differently (facing the center perhaps?).
Another alternative is to keep it there but put the rocks #3 on the yellow base CC spot, instead of on the ramp. Two ramps leading to a yellow is a good thing.
|
What's the size of the map? If it's as big as steps of war it's very unfair towards Zerg, but what if it's huge?
|
So basically you have 2 routes into your main? Proxy rush inc. Just sayin
|
I'm going to remake a map I made for broodwar named imperial scars which I think would be nice in starcraft 2
![[image loading]](http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i171/OodieM/2ImperialScars.jpg)
definitely making it 3 levels of play rather than 2 which will even the map out a bit
|
I'd say you've got a solid design already you may want to wait for some play testing to happen to make any further adjustments. I'm working on some map sketches myself, I'll post when they are ready.
|
Perhaps the second expansion, which is so easily defensible, should have no gas. Make players choose between a safe expo and a more profitable expo.
Or perhaps the gas is too important for players to ever choose safety first.
At any rate, I like the direction it's heading. Keep it up!
|
Instead of having two naturals, I think you should make the backdoor natural a mineral-only nat. This way it'll add more variety to the map and it'll force the player to choose which natural they want to expo to first.
|
Alright, updated version.
Longer rush distance, improved middle area. High yield moved to middle. Removed gas from back natural. Added expansion to compensate for gas removal in natural.
I might remove rock nr.3
+ Show Spoiler +
Thanks everyone you are very helpful!
|
On April 22 2010 07:47 nixi wrote:
The watchtowers were slightly moved and I added a circle to show their range. As you can see, stalkers can blink up that natural cliff if a xel'naga tower is taken.
You might want to give just enough vision on top of these cliffs that a zerg player might put down a nydus here as well. Just to even it out a bit and give zerg some nice harass options as well.
This looks like a great map and I would definitly like to try it out once it is finished.
Keep up the good work :D
|
Any updates since the world editor actually came out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l219/nixi_03/Nixi_starcraft2map1.png)
![[image loading]](http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l219/nixi_03/Nixi_starcraft2map1_v05.png)
![[image loading]](http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/1698/sc2map.png)
![[image loading]](http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l169/Onira_2006/AlteracvalleySC2.jpg)
