EPT[M] The Butterfly Effect - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
thezergk
United States492 Posts
| ||
|
USn
United States376 Posts
| ||
|
onmach
United States1241 Posts
| ||
|
dogabutila
United States1438 Posts
| ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On June 12 2010 05:24 onmach wrote: I'm a bit worried about what mineral only expansions will do to play. As long as z and p can only use them for zerglings and zealots, while terran can use them for both hellions and marines, that's potentially hard to deal with. I hope it turns out that it isn't too much of a problem. In theory the mineral only expansions actually help Zerg more than the other races, as zerg can build armies based on little gas and have them been effective especially since taking a mineral only expo boosts your larva count as well. in practice it's likely the zerg will try to take the mineral only expo + the high yield gas expo. the gas expansions tend to be low on minerals, and as such force even more expanding, and that kind of play favors zerg. protoss benefits greatly from the forcefields as they can break them VERY early with hallucinations and that gives them an expansion advantage early on. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
however, I think it would be cooler if both sides were the same color butterflies are the same colors on both wings -.- | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On June 12 2010 05:38 travis wrote: this map looks awesome! however, I think it would be cooler if both sides were the same color butterflies are the same colors on both wings -.- actually they will be the same color, i'm doing textures in layers, what you see on the right is actually PRE final layer, and what you see on the left is the final layer. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17864 Posts
But I have to commend you on your work. I tried to make some maps for a while in WC3 and it's damn tough business (I'd rather polish my AI's). | ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
On June 12 2010 05:36 PrinceXizor wrote: In theory the mineral only expansions actually help Zerg more than the other races, as zerg can build armies based on little gas and have them been effective especially since taking a mineral only expo boosts your larva count as well. in practice it's likely the zerg will try to take the mineral only expo + the high yield gas expo. the gas expansions tend to be low on minerals, and as such force even more expanding, and that kind of play favors zerg. protoss benefits greatly from the forcefields as they can break them VERY early with hallucinations and that gives them an expansion advantage early on. i say its opposite, terran will destroy the destructible rocks easy with 3-6 marauders // reapers and still have FF at the ramp to block early agression while the other factions will rather opt to have the ffs present but destroying the rocks much later than what terrans are capable off. | ||
|
phyre112
United States3090 Posts
Also, something should be done to stop Terran from lifting their way into the fourth - placing a forcefield in the position at which the CC would land would make sense, that way terran is forced to expose the expo to a zerg if they want to use it... because lets face it, having to tech to hive and get ultras (especially on limited resources) just to be able to attack a base with ground is slightly ridiculous. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
also the forcefield IS covering where the CC would land. There are actually more resources than blistering sands (as well as similiar rush distances) but. Blistering sands has Main, Natural, full Third, High Yield. for each player, this map gets: Main, Natural, full third, high yield, full mineral only, a partial mineral only, a partial regular expo. for each player. just decisions have to be made: riskier expansions and more resources, or safe expansions and fewer resources. | ||
|
Christmastaflex
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
Doc Daneeka
United States577 Posts
| ||
|
FarbrorAbavna
Sweden4856 Posts
Oh and if it were all black against a white background it would pretty much look like a rorschach pic :D | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
for the siege tank issue, look at the alternate version ans tell me if that would be better as a map? For instance you can take the high yield Gas expo + the partial expo located here: ![[image loading]](http://i973.photobucket.com/albums/ae216/XizorHalfwingseen/butterflyeffectv0_0gasother.jpg) high yield in white and partial in red. and those two expansion areas are easily protected by a single choke. | ||
|
yarkO
Canada810 Posts
Personally, I'm 100% opposed to minerals on the edge of cliffs like on this map, also seen in Desert Oasis. I think it promotes cheesey builds and really takes away from the experience. Especially now, where the high ground advantage is only vision. Not sure if it's like that or not, but the left path seems a bit narrower at the top than the right path. May mean nothing because I can't see actual scale, but it seems pretty tight on the left. Almost enough that sieged Tanks on the other side of the water could cut units off trying to hug the cliff to get out of the main. | ||
|
7mk
Germany10157 Posts
On June 11 2010 06:58 Madkipz wrote: JESUS H CHRIST you go long ways to prevent an easier third expo and to top it off its mineral only? what was going trough your head? Not only that but the main is siegeable? as zerg i would most likely downthumb this map While I certainly think you have a point you could make the same statement without sounding like a dick | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On June 12 2010 07:54 yarkO wrote: As another poster mentioned, the mains (and protected 3rds) seem a little bit too big. Personally, I'm 100% opposed to minerals on the edge of cliffs like on this map, also seen in Desert Oasis. I think it promotes cheesey builds and really takes away from the experience. Especially now, where the high ground advantage is only vision. Not sure if it's like that or not, but the left path seems a bit narrower at the top than the right path. May mean nothing because I can't see actual scale, but it seems pretty tight on the left. Almost enough that sieged Tanks on the other side of the water could cut units off trying to hug the cliff to get out of the main. it's not i checked. look at the alternate version at the bottom of the OP and tell my what you think about it. | ||
|
Tazza
Korea (South)1678 Posts
| ||
| ||
