@BoxedCube re zerusmap - I get the feeling this would be hugely zerg-favored and would favor T bio in TvP a lot. I can't imagine even the soul train being able to win a PvZ on this map. The counterattack paths might benefit from a size reduction, especially the path to the natural backdoor.

@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

April 23 2013 23:53 GMT

#1042

I would like some good feedback on this map. The concept is an "island" map for sc2.

SidianTheBard

United States2474 Posts

April 24 2013 00:37 GMT

#1043

Messing around with a team map. 2v2. Thoughts? (I've never made a team map before heh)

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

April 24 2013 00:43 GMT

#1044

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

April 24 2013 00:52 GMT

#1045

@InfCereal The island bases in the middle will be Terran heaven, map is splitty and drops will be super easy at the large natural.

@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

April 24 2013 01:50 GMT

#1046

An update on the previous one.
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
[image loading]

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

April 24 2013 18:33 GMT

#1047

Here is a remake of nightshade I have been playing around with. Feedback would be appreciated

[image loading]

maxpower13

United Kingdom5 Posts

April 24 2013 18:39 GMT

#1048

Making a 1v1 map at the moment, i wanted some thoughts on the layout, i'm wondering about the bases at the top left, i feel they don't fit too well. Any comments are appreciated.
The map is 160x160

FlyingBeer

United States262 Posts

April 25 2013 06:39 GMT

#1049

I have no idea how to size the attack paths for a 2v2. I'm particularly worried that the area around the 3rds is too chokey, and wondering if I should cut out a base from there to create more space. The center feels slightly too open, but that's simply a matter of adding small path blockers. I'm also wondering if I should just throw everything out and start over or work on a 3v3 map instead.

[image loading]

TheFish7

United States2824 Posts

April 25 2013 13:10 GMT

#1050

In my opinion (and Blizzard's based on their map pool) 2v2, 4v4,and 3v3 maps should have roughly similar rush distances as 1v1 maps, although they've experimented more with both longer and shorter rush distances in some of their latest maps. The difference being that you have to fit more bases into a map that has the same distances, and you need to provide a lot more room for armies to maneuver around the map. I believe the most bases in any 2v2 ladder map is 20, and that is an 8 spawn map.

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

April 25 2013 21:49 GMT

#1051

Name: Biome Prime
Bounds: 144x144
This is the first map I'm considering submitting for the map contest.

Any concerns?

InfCereal

Canada1759 Posts

April 26 2013 02:41 GMT

#1052

Hi, any comments on this layout?

[image loading]

sCnDiamond

Germany340 Posts

April 26 2013 22:39 GMT

#1053

I started mapping again, too. But damn, i suck at it! I was so unsatisfied with my first try, that i dumped it before i finished it, and i feel like the second one might be too chokey.
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

April 26 2013 23:00 GMT

#1054

@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.

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

April 27 2013 03:28 GMT

#1055

147x147
Any comments or concerns?

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

April 27 2013 04:06 GMT

#1056

@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.

@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

April 27 2013 13:33 GMT

#1057

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

April 27 2013 16:57 GMT

#1058

On April 27 2013 08:00 FlyingBeer wrote:
@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.

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?

On April 27 2013 13:06 EatThePath wrote:
@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.

Thank you for your feedback, looking forward towards your drawing

FlyingBeer

United States262 Posts

April 27 2013 17:28 GMT

#1059

I consider the top left and bottom right bases to be the fourth. The base to the right of the natural choke isn't really a viable third. It's both closer to your opponent's base and further away from your own base with roughly the same size attack paths leading into it. A good example of maps with two potential thirds is something like Neo Planet S, Shakuras Plateau, or Silver Sands. In all cases, the forward base (closer to your opponent) on those maps has fewer or smaller chokes to defend. The backwards base (further from your opponent) is more wide open and/or harder to get to.

sCnDiamond

Germany340 Posts

April 27 2013 19:56 GMT

#1060

@FlyingBeer:
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.