@Caviar re newsnowproject - main backdoors pretty much always feel like a bad idea to me. if this one could work it would have to be after you choke that path up a bunch, probably make it a one-wide ramp. the watchtowers might be too good. besides that I think it looks awesome.
Work In Progress Melee Maps - Page 53
Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin | ||
Xenotolerance
United States464 Posts
@Caviar re newsnowproject - main backdoors pretty much always feel like a bad idea to me. if this one could work it would have to be after you choke that path up a bunch, probably make it a one-wide ramp. the watchtowers might be too good. besides that I think it looks awesome. | ||
MarcusRife
343 Posts
![]() | ||
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
![]() | ||
![]()
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On April 24 2013 08:53 MarcusRife wrote: I would like some good feedback on this map. The concept is an "island" map for sc2. + Show Spoiler + those 4th bases seem very exposed. | ||
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
@Caviar I like the XNC feel, cool aesthetics. Hard to say how the backdoor will work out, but considering it is the natural attack path as soon as you hit 3 bases - might be tough to defend properly. @BoxedCube Solid layout. The nat and 3rd might be a bit on the open side. I feel it just needs more polishing, choke sizes measured out, doodading etc. @Xenotolerance The bounds are very big, Tal'Darim was 176x176 and Whirlwind 168x160. I think you will find that maneuvering an army through that middle is tediou. I like the narrow ridge to the middle, but feel that there are too many chokes in awkward spots. @WedRine The 3rd is far but its kind of an interesting feature considering the logical 4th is closer but assaultable. Your proportioning is great though and the theme is very pretty. @Sidian I think you could get away with a bigger choke at the shared natural, it looks pretty easy to wall off. The layout is pretty sweet though. | ||
BoxedCube
United States23 Posts
Did some debugging with the terrain created more chokes the middle to make it just a tad bit less open Made the more defensible third a bit more defensible to exchange for the more vulnerable mineral line ![]() I hope this wont be too choked up while allowing terran and protoss some free space to maneuver and gain advantages while still allow zerg lots of counter plays and opportunities for surround. Still need to work on some doodads. Could anyone refer me to a guide or some personal advice? Thx : ) | ||
Caviar
70 Posts
![]() | ||
maxpower13
United Kingdom5 Posts
The map is 160x160 ![]() | ||
FlyingBeer
United States262 Posts
![]() | ||
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
| ||
![]()
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
Bounds: 144x144 This is the first map I'm considering submitting for the map contest. ![]() Any concerns? | ||
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
![]() | ||
sCnDiamond
Germany340 Posts
first attempt: (spawns bottom left & top right) ![]() second attempt: (spawns bottom left & top right) ![]() (cliff above 3 & 9 o'clock will be unpathable.) | ||
FlyingBeer
United States262 Posts
| ||
| ||
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
@templar the main is kind of big. You could chop out the forward cliff to reduce the size and make it less blink/reaper vulnerable. There's also a lot of airspace around it. The natural choke is wider than standard FFE and that gas pokes out awkwardly. You could rearrange the main/nat to help this. The lowground 3rd is cool but pretty anti zerg. Push it farther away from the cliff so that it's not tankable and the distance is increased, maybe widen ramp to 3 from 2 as well. Neat idea though. The 4th and 5th are like right next to each other. They need to be more distinct. You could also add another neutral base in the very top left corner but if not that's fine. I think you should move the watchtower to the little alcove just under the rocks. That way it watches the main attack path for the early/midgame, and it also covers the rocks pathway, but you'd have to have control of the main path to watch the rocks. In the middle, it's too powerful lategame. The highground there is already a nice position (I like this a lot) so I don't think you need to exaggerate it with a tower. Overall very pleasing mirror map that I'd like to see tuned up. This could become a real contender imo and probably your best map, already has probably best overall concept. (I mean that genuinely, not trying to condescend.) @inf That grey map with no bases placed yet -- the 3 paths are quite far apart, which usually I'd say it's a problem. But it's sort of the point of the map here yeah? And it's kind of cool. The proportions are good on the center path but the left and right wing are too big. I think you can reduce the width of the map 4-8 squares on both sides which is good anyway because the map is pretty big. Like the whole thing could be tightened up to fit more into a rectangle and it'd all flow a little better for it. Natural should be slightly larger, main slightly smaller, 3rd area could be smaller, etc. Should I draw it? I will put some more feedback later. so many maps! | ||
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On April 27 2013 13:06 EatThePath wrote: @inf That grey map with no bases placed yet -- the 3 paths are quite far apart, which usually I'd say it's a problem. But it's sort of the point of the map here yeah? And it's kind of cool. The proportions are good on the center path but the left and right wing are too big. I think you can reduce the width of the map 4-8 squares on both sides which is good anyway because the map is pretty big. Like the whole thing could be tightened up to fit more into a rectangle and it'd all flow a little better for it. Natural should be slightly larger, main slightly smaller, 3rd area could be smaller, etc. Should I draw it? I will put some more feedback later. so many maps! If you wanna do a sketch, for sure go for it, and thank you for the help! | ||
sCnDiamond
Germany340 Posts
On April 27 2013 08:00 FlyingBeer wrote: Thank you for the feedback. Which base do you consider the 4th? I wanted some bases which you take later to be easier to defend and further apart from your opponent. I think you can take your 3rd either way, in a line or in a triangle and the other one is the 4th. Can you do some sketches?@spinnaker The layout on that 2nd one looks really cool. The only thing I would say is that the fourth is too safe, and the center feels slightly too dangerous. The 4th is back in a corner, so long rush distance to get to it, and there's only one new attack path leading into it which replaces an almost identically sized attack path leading into the 3rd. I would widen that one attack path, and then add a second going from the high center plateau down to the corner. For the center, I would suggest replacing the 5-wide ramps with either 4-wide or 3-wide ramps, just so it's not so incredibly dangerous to walk through. On April 27 2013 13:06 EatThePath wrote: Thank you for your feedback, looking forward towards your drawing @spinnaker those are cool, the first one is too big but this is easy to fix. the second one is cool but could be a lot better with some adjustments, pretty much agree with flyingbeer. I will draw some ideas later. ![]() | ||
FlyingBeer
United States262 Posts
| ||
sCnDiamond
Germany340 Posts
Thanks for the feedback. I will try to make the other base more viable as a 3rd. I made several changes to the map today. ![]() | ||
| ||