|
![[image loading]](http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/9206/90014685.png)
(2) Flying Squirrel or Pony?
+ Show Spoiler +
New pic: (revised based on feedback)
![[image loading]](http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/1825/terrain034.jpg)
Edited features:
-Space between nat and 3rd
-Smaller main
Old pic:
+ Show Spoiler +
132x134 playable, pretty much exactly the same as Lost Temple (from memory :D), but less dead space around the edges so actually a tad bigger.
Some features:
+ Show Spoiler +
10 mining locations (that'd be 8 potential expos, 2 of those being gold)
Mid ramps are pretty wide, as can be seen by comparing them to the mineral lines, main should also be a decent enough size.
2x Xel'naga towers inside los blockers at the mid not too dominant but sure worth sparing a ling or an scv.
Main ramps are reversed which might bring up some funkyness as defending them is pretty much worse than attacking, can be negated by walling off on top making it function more like a normal same level choke (although more exposed) or by just walling the expo, which feels kind of scrap station ramp size'ish.
Travel distance from inside main to inside main is about ~40sec real time ( no accurate clock available but 1minute got 1 & 1/2 trips)
Still a work in progress somewhat so no dl yet.
Any glaring or non-glaring balance issues?
More pics:
+ Show Spoiler +Main, nat and 3rd(s) and 4th and gold (5th/alt 3rd?)![[image loading]](http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/7057/terrain032.jpg) Corner expos and surroundings ![[image loading]](http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/38/terrain030.jpg)
Map thread:
+ Show Spoiler +
Download link to try it out:
http://www.sc2mapster.com/maps/roadrunnersc2/files/13-flying-pony/
|
looks abit imbalanced if terran sieges up on the 3rd and blasts your natural to pieces. and the run there is soo long.. maybe make ramp from 2nd to third in a safer place.
|
On June 17 2010 04:33 qoolqop wrote:
looks abit imbalanced if terran sieges up on the 3rd and blasts your natural to pieces. and the run there is soo long.. maybe make ramp from 2nd to third in a safer place.
terran imbalanced? a main on the lowground? how is that favor terran? just because terran can siege up and hit a single gas geyser doesn't mean its imbalanced....
every map thread i go to i see "map is imbalanced because terran can siege this one specific spot and hit a gas geyser! oh noes!" ... when you try to give analysis of someone's map, how bout put some effort into it instead of jumping on the terran imbalanced bandwagon
on lost temple, you can siege up and actually hit the CC/nexus/hatch from the cliff next to the natural, but is LT imbalanced?
|
taht doesnt look like a flyin squueril at all! wtf?!?!??!
|
On June 17 2010 04:43 Challe wrote:
taht doesnt look like a flyin squueril at all! wtf?!?!??!
it looks more like aah, PONY ;OOOOOO ITS THE TEAMLIQUID PONY ;OOOO
edit: i feel that the xel naga watch towers should be on opposite ends so that you could easily see your opponent move out rather than look over to see if he has tried to take his gold.
|
This actually might not favor Terran. Their wall-off on this map is going to suck big time because of the low ground mains. Protoss and to a lesser extent zerg may be able to pick apart the wall in from the high ground with roaches, stalkers or quick hydras. TvT on this map is going to be the most ridiculous. There's no way to have any sort of comprehensive defense on this map as Terran and in a mirror match, since Terran have the best early and mid ranged options, it's going to be way more pronounced.
I think overall this is a Protoss map. A lot of great blink stalker and colossi routes, advantage vs Terran with low ground mains, and PvZ there's a great wall in opportunity at the nat for a more FE style of play followed up by great FF opportunities with all the ramps/chokes and the defender's low ground disadvantage. The colossi advantage is especially of note. Typically a defending zerg has an advantage where colossi can't micro up/down cliffs to avoid being hit as the zerg control the high ground. On this map it's the opposite so an attacking Protoss can micro his colossi to devastating affect. On the flip side the aggression of zerg may has a little less problem with colossi micro, but even then the wall-offs help to still give the Protoss the advantage.
EDIT: My recommendation? Put some dead space between the natural and the 3rd. Right now with the cliff like that it makes any wall-off really vulnerable to attacks from above. It doesn't need to be 13 units wide (protected from siege tanks), just 6 or more for normal ranged units.
I suppose you can wall at the top of the ramp which would be workable but a bit funky. The problem to that is it opens the attacker up to great flux vs your wall making busts a LOT more viable, especially since they can use a few ranged units to pick off your defenders.
|
On June 17 2010 04:36 OpRaider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 04:33 qoolqop wrote:
looks abit imbalanced if terran sieges up on the 3rd and blasts your natural to pieces. and the run there is soo long.. maybe make ramp from 2nd to third in a safer place. terran imbalanced? a main on the lowground? how is that favor terran? just because terran can siege up and hit a single gas geyser doesn't mean its imbalanced.... every map thread i go to i see "map is imbalanced because terran can siege this one specific spot and hit a gas geyser! oh noes!" ... when you try to give analysis of someone's map, how bout put some effort into it instead of jumping on the terran imbalanced bandwagon on lost temple, you can siege up and actually hit the CC/nexus/hatch from the cliff next to the natural, but is LT imbalanced?
Pretty sure he's talking about 3rd to natural relations where he might have a little point.
Nothing that a bit of "strategy grass" can't fix though if needed :D
where the red stuff is, would require air spotting or at least some units on the low ground
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 17 2010 04:43 Challe wrote:
taht doesnt look like a flyin squueril at all! wtf?!?!??!
A diagonal one :D
+ Show Spoiler +
or something like that but better proportioned
Pony works too I guess, would be better with some retexturing:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
The mains look HUGE! I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Otherwise I actually like the look of it for the most part.
I'm totally sick of hearing that the entire world is imba for terran because OMFG TANKS AAAHHHH! There are other units in the game which can be cliff'd so stop with the whinning about tanks.
Also agree with Logo.
|
I like it, looks very macro oriented, promotes quick expos for sure. Couple of points:
Is the choke at the natural wallable? Hard to tell the size (can i blocked by 2 gates like desert oasis for example)
And why did you choose to have the mains so big? It looks quite a bit larger than the average base size, I guess it could be good for proxying, and staging an army for a drop just looks a little larger than necessary.
Overall A+
|
I can see the squirrel in the map (Or I'm crazy).
I like this one. Gonna be some fun macro games on this one, I'll give it a try when i can.
|
On June 17 2010 04:48 Logo wrote:
EDIT: My recommendation? Put some dead space between the natural and the 3rd. Right now with the cliff like that it makes any wall-off really vulnerable to attacks from above. It doesn't need to be 13 units wide (protected from siege tanks), just 6 or more for normal ranged units.
I suppose you can wall at the top of the ramp which would be workable but a bit funky. The problem to that is it opens the attacker up to great flux vs your wall making busts a LOT more viable, especially since they can use a few ranged units to pick off your defenders.
Guess this would work:
+ Show Spoiler +
About the main's size, yes maybe too big, i've just gotten so much "main small?" stuff I made them "pretty big", maybe cutting a bit off wouldn't hurt too much.
Just found a steppes of war pic and the main (pretty big) is a bit smaller than mine, so yes maybe a bit more unpassable terrain or water.
|
|
|
On June 17 2010 04:52 Grebliv wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 04:36 OpRaider wrote:On June 17 2010 04:33 qoolqop wrote:
looks abit imbalanced if terran sieges up on the 3rd and blasts your natural to pieces. and the run there is soo long.. maybe make ramp from 2nd to third in a safer place. terran imbalanced? a main on the lowground? how is that favor terran? just because terran can siege up and hit a single gas geyser doesn't mean its imbalanced.... every map thread i go to i see "map is imbalanced because terran can siege this one specific spot and hit a gas geyser! oh noes!" ... when you try to give analysis of someone's map, how bout put some effort into it instead of jumping on the terran imbalanced bandwagon on lost temple, you can siege up and actually hit the CC/nexus/hatch from the cliff next to the natural, but is LT imbalanced? Pretty sure he's talking about 3rd to natural relations where he might have a little point. Nothing that a bit of "strategy grass" can't fix though if needed :D where the red stuff is, would require air spotting or at least some units on the low ground + Show Spoiler +Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 04:43 Challe wrote:
taht doesnt look like a flyin squueril at all! wtf?!?!??! A diagonal one :D + Show Spoiler +or something like that but better proportioned Pony works too I guess, would be better with some retexturing: + Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7875/ponyyyyyyy.jpg)
PONYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!! yea but even if you add strategy grass people would call it imbalance. Its fine as long as a reaper cant stand on the edge there and bomb the forward gas.
|
On June 17 2010 05:06 Grebliv wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 04:48 Logo wrote:
EDIT: My recommendation? Put some dead space between the natural and the 3rd. Right now with the cliff like that it makes any wall-off really vulnerable to attacks from above. It doesn't need to be 13 units wide (protected from siege tanks), just 6 or more for normal ranged units.
I suppose you can wall at the top of the ramp which would be workable but a bit funky. The problem to that is it opens the attacker up to great flux vs your wall making busts a LOT more viable, especially since they can use a few ranged units to pick off your defenders. Guess this would work: + Show Spoiler +About the main's size, yes maybe too big, i've just gotten so much "main small?" stuff I made them "pretty big", maybe cutting a bit off wouldn't hurt too much. Just found a steppes of war pic and the main (pretty big) is a bit smaller than mine, so yes maybe a bit more unpassable terrain or water.
Yeah I think that'd help a lot.
Also the mains HAVE to be bigger than normal, don't change it. Small mains would ruin this map as any buildings within 6 range of the edge of the main are extremely vulnerable as they can be picked off by units outside the main.
The more I think about it the more I wonder if you're going to have problems with this map favoring drops. You can't really turret up right on the edge (see previous) and you can't see up high ground (obviously) so your base is really exposed to drops, and to a lesser extent nydus. This arguably could favor any of the races, it's hard to say, but it probably impacts Zerg the least (overlord spotting).
Not trying to say favoring drops makes the map unusable (or the low mains in general), it's just important to have these things in mind.
|
This map seems pretty good. I love the wide open middle and narrow sides to create a sneaky flank or backstab. I don't think siege tanks attacking the natural from the third is a problem because it is easy to deny tanks there in the first place if you defend it properly. But you might want to add a gap for normal (6 rangeish) units should not snipe stuff. Also, rename the map to pony, cause I saw a pony before flying squirrel. =p
|
On June 17 2010 05:02 Inkarnate wrote:
I like it, looks very macro oriented, promotes quick expos for sure. Couple of points:
Is the choke at the natural wallable? Hard to tell the size (can i blocked by 2 gates like desert oasis for example)
And why did you choose to have the mains so big? It looks quite a bit larger than the average base size, I guess it could be good for proxying, and staging an army for a drop just looks a little larger than necessary.
Overall A+
This is the tightest wall I think, 1&1/2 space or there about (diagonal counting for 1/2 ;D)
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 17 2010 05:10 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:06 Grebliv wrote:On June 17 2010 04:48 Logo wrote:
EDIT: My recommendation? Put some dead space between the natural and the 3rd. Right now with the cliff like that it makes any wall-off really vulnerable to attacks from above. It doesn't need to be 13 units wide (protected from siege tanks), just 6 or more for normal ranged units.
I suppose you can wall at the top of the ramp which would be workable but a bit funky. The problem to that is it opens the attacker up to great flux vs your wall making busts a LOT more viable, especially since they can use a few ranged units to pick off your defenders. Guess this would work: + Show Spoiler +About the main's size, yes maybe too big, i've just gotten so much "main small?" stuff I made them "pretty big", maybe cutting a bit off wouldn't hurt too much. Just found a steppes of war pic and the main (pretty big) is a bit smaller than mine, so yes maybe a bit more unpassable terrain or water. Yeah I think that'd help a lot. Also the mains HAVE to be bigger than normal, don't change it. Small mains would ruin this map as any buildings within 6 range of the edge of the main are extremely vulnerable as they can be picked off by units outside the main. The more I think about it the more I wonder if you're going to have problems with this map favoring drops. You can't really turret up right on the edge (see previous) and you can't see up high ground (obviously) so your base is really exposed to drops, and to a lesser extent nydus. This arguably could favor any of the races, it's hard to say, but it probably impacts Zerg the least (overlord spotting). Not trying to say favoring drops makes the map unusable (or the low mains in general), it's just important to have these things in mind.
Something like this being unpassable might keep the mains safe but a bit smaller
+ Show Spoiler +
|
It'd keep it safe from drops (maybe a good thing maybe bad). So yeah that could work. At the same time if you want drops to be the flavor of the map then it might not be an issue, players will just have to think out how they want their base laid out.
EDIT: Also that would cut out reaper harass which may be the one thing that really gives Terran a good game plan on this map so overall it might do more harm than help. Well maybe not, reapers might still be really good with the left side of the base.
|
On June 17 2010 05:22 Logo wrote:
It'd keep it safe from drops (maybe a good thing maybe bad). So yeah that could work. At the same time if you want drops to be the flavor of the map then it might not be an issue, players will just have to think out how they want their base laid out.
EDIT: Also that would cut out reaper harass which may be the one thing that really gives Terran a good game plan on this map so overall it might do more harm than help.
A gap of unpassable terrain with a path or two might do it (path being a spot of land still unchanged from it's current status) so there are still some reaper routes.
-------
Current tank and reaper range
+ Show Spoiler +
Tank can hit the cc somewhat handily but reapers need to risk themselves to damage anything not placed above the gas.
Probably making it a bit harder to tank but still "possible" somewhat to at least damage the outer perimiter stuff, as far as I am now.
EDIT:
![[image loading]](http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/2173/fstankts.jpg)
Currently tanks can hit the command structure just barely but need vision as seen in the pic,
the funky terrain between them and the nat is unpathable
|
MAINS ARE THE SIZE OF RUSSIA
Zerglings will starve to death on the journey to the ramp...
too big man
|
Wow this is actually a really cool map, I want to try it out sometime 
|
New pic;
-smaller main, space between nat and 3rd
|
Seriously, your mapmaking is awesome! I saw your other thread with maps, and they all looked fabulous and relatively well balanced and now you add this map which also looks really good.
I like how you mixed the sizes of the main base, leaving paths for reaper harass, which is a nice touch to give each race a lot of options.
|
not sure if i agree with the smaller mains on a lowered main map..
but i like the way tanks cant see anything without air support, and can see all the way to CC with it :-)
also, high grond in the center favours map contorl/pushing a lot more than most of the blizzard maps do. another interesting feature.
|
On June 17 2010 07:01 gerundium wrote:
Seriously, your mapmaking is awesome! I saw your other thread with maps, and they all looked fabulous and relatively well balanced and now you add this map which also looks really good.
I like how you mixed the sizes of the main base, leaving paths for reaper harass, which is a nice touch to give each race a lot of options.
Thanks for the compliment
On June 17 2010 07:02 arthur wrote:
not sure if i agree with the smaller mains on a lowered main map..
but i like the way tanks cant see anything without air support, and can see all the way to CC with it :-)
also, high grond in the center favours map contorl/pushing a lot more than most of the blizzard maps do. another interesting feature.
The main should be somewhat spaced from the "mainland" so it's still big in effect but has a buffer of non-droppable/buildable terrain around it to ease a little bit on the in base proxy/drops and such.
Tanks f.x. stationed on the outer rim overlooking the main should not really be in range of much if anything at all.
|
probably the best original SC2 map i've seen.. great job ;o
|
Now I really like it....very cool and instantly recognizable...
great job, can't wait to play
|
Thanks been waiting for a gauranteed win with cannon rushes every game.
|
Finally an open map! +1 to this
|
I registered to say that I think this is a really good map. I think the worries about drop play being favored or the size of the mains are a bit overblown. The main has to be a tad big to make Nydus a threat. I'm not seeing this as wildly out of control.
The thing I like most about the map is how the center is completely open, zerg-surround heaven. Most maps neglect this nowadays. Its fantastic this is counterbalanced by the fact there is a narrow, terran-friendly corridor extending around the center. In short -- players have to choose whether to take the quick path across the center and risk the surround or to take the long path and hope they're not bypassed. I like it.
Being able to siege the natural is bad, but by all means, let them siege the third. That's what thirds are for.
|
On June 17 2010 17:50 Cedstick wrote:
Thanks been waiting for a gauranteed win with cannon rushes every game.
lolwut?
|
On June 17 2010 19:41 sob3k wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 17:50 Cedstick wrote:
Thanks been waiting for a gauranteed win with cannon rushes every game. lolwut?
He saw through the plot, been refining this cannon build for a long time now!
On June 17 2010 18:52 Cotonou wrote:
Being able to siege the natural is bad, but by all means, let them siege the third. That's what thirds are for.
Not sure if I'm going to keep the siegeable nat but right now it is BARELY so, you can hit like 1 hex of the cc if you get vision, this is nothing like lost temple cliffing (you can't hit any workers)
Might move the 3rd about a bit so it's more easily siegeable from the low ground on the other side and then also get rid of the nat sieging oppurtunity.
|
This is definitely one of the better maps I have seen come out of TL.net lately. Great job.
|
This map is sexy. I am not going to lie. Probably one of the only maps suggested that severely does not need anything to be changed.
And I love it can look like a flying squirrel or a pony
|
Pwetty looking map. Working my way up from lower ground is a scary but interesting concept.
|
id love to test this map
Can't wait for blizz to sort out the custom maps so we can finally test actualy maps rather than shitloads of slightly different turret defences.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks good
|
Heh, another map I really like. Good job, can't wait to try it.
|
Hmmmm. Will 1 base play work on this? I mean with the main being on lower ground and all.
|
I think it will play well, kinda tired of the go-to complain being terran OP due to tanks..every map should/has some terrain that is advantageous for tanks..just like there should be other terrain where they are not so good..
|
On June 23 2010 22:58 Deyster wrote:
Hmmmm. Will 1 base play work on this? I mean with the main being on lower ground and all.
One base offensive, why not? Defensive probably not. There are a bunch of BW maps with an inverted ramp, it just lends to a little bit different play.
|
judging by the looks it looks very interesting. looking forward to playing it =)
|
On June 17 2010 05:58 sob3k wrote:
MAINS ARE THE SIZE OF RUSSIA
Zerglings will starve to death on the journey to the ramp...
too big man
It's fine in my opinion, alot of room for terran / toss to build..buildings, as long as it's hard to do run by.
Hope this map gets thrown in the map pool as it seems pretty cool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/6084/horsec.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/8122/terrain033.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/7442/terrain032f.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/7554/terrain031d.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/4584/terrain031p.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/5663/fs1w.png)
Shades of Twilight![[image loading]](http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/1589/fswall.png)
![[image loading]](http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/2457/terrain031e.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/7971/fstest.jpg)
