|
Untitled (Beta v0.2) updated 7/25/10
Soo after a good deal of meditation this is what I came up with: Overview:
Angled Overview: + Show Spoiler +
Map Analyzer: + Show Spoiler +
It underwent like 20 minor versions that weren't posted. I am spending a lot of time thinking about this layout; I want to get it just right. Map still needs bashing.
edit: Oh btw I see that little inconsistency with the naturals I'm all over it.
- Barrin ------------------------------------
Untitled (Beta v0.1) // I could use help with this map's name.
Introduction:
The purpose of this map is to explore the potential of my idea of a "perfectly symmetrical" map. In a post I made a few days ago, I explain how the only type of symmetry that is closest to true symmetry is Vertical Axis Reflection Symmetry, or VARS. While this type of symmetry is fairly pleasing to someone with OCD, I am not entirely convinced that VARS is really the way to go, but I will be finishing this map just to get it out of my system.
Please keep in mind that my main goal with this map (and my next few maps) will be to have then used in real 1v1 Tournaments where people are making money. If I fail to get this map into any 1v1 Tournament, it is a complete failure in my eyes.
------------------------------------
Before I get started, I want you to know that I want you to take a good deal of time looking at this map and thinking about what you know about strategy. When you think you are done I want you to take just another minute to think about it.
Then, I want you to chew it up and spit it out. I want you to stomp on it multiple times with hard rubber boots before telling it how weak and pathetic it is and how there is never any chance that it will never ever be taken seriously. And then you're gonna tell it why in very small words so that something so stupid can understand. You will be very elaborate, indeed it should be as if you are purposely abusing it's mental and emotional health over a prolonged period of time.
------------------------------------
+ Show Spoiler [outdated] + ------------------------------------
Author's Map Feature Thoughts:
+ Show Spoiler [outdated] ++ Show Spoiler [Labelled Image] +1) These are areas where Reapers/Colossus can move into the main for harassment. 2) Main early/midgame pathways. 3) Mid/lategame pathways (blocked by destructables). The big area near the north watch towers are going to be key in the late-game for map control. 4) Destructable Rocks. 5) These will be unpathable. Their only purpose is to buff air harassment and just air in general. 6) Watch Towers. The southern ones are the only ones you can access easily in the early/midgame, and they do not cover any part of the shortest routes, but they should be pretty important late-game and for watching anything taking the back route. The northern towers are underneath destructable rocks and it's ramp is also only accessible after breaking rocks by normal troops. These will be critical for any type of play towards the late game and will be highly contested over, giving reason to break those rocks down. 7) This is the shortest ground path to your enemy early-game. And it's not short at all, which should encourage macro play. Late-game this path will be very dangerous to take if you do not have air control, as it is essentially a valley and therefore pretty vulnerable to air attacks/harass. It is a fairly narrow pathway too, but should be vulnerable to ambushes in a few areas. 8) These will be gold expansions. The northern one will be 6 high-yield minerals, and 2 high-yield gas. The southern one will be 8 high-yield minerals, and 2 regular gas. Building placement blocked by rocks.
Other thoughts:
- 160x160, playable: 140x132
- Uses Vertical Axis Reflection Symmetry (VARS). See my thread here about the significant of this.
- Your main-natural ramp goes down north, and not diagonally. This is very different from almost any other map, and is in tune with VARS. It takes an extra building to wall off this ramp, but it shouldn't mean too much because of the long rush distances.
- Map should encourage macro play.
- Rush distances are huge.
- The terrain layout should make you think twice where to place your army.
- Despite that it's not an island map, air units should be particularly viable. If not to abuse terrain (#5 above), then simply to be able to ignore all the crazy army positioning options on the ground. All bases have a decent gap between their edge and the edge of the map (not too big though).
- Harassment should be extremely viable. I am not sure I have really hit this one yet, could use some more ideas.
- All rocks should have a significant reason to break them. The ones that do not block bases are blocking key pathways towards the later game. There should not be too many rocks, but spending time breaking one rock should be an important decision over breaking another one.
- I am considering placing a few hostile units throughout the map. They would fit into a theme. Maybe turning the northern gold expansion into a realish looking hostile NPC/destructable expansion or something like that.
- more things as I think about them will go here.
------------------------------------
But that's enough about what I think.
What do you think? Remember, be excessively brutal.
*Reminder: I am only interested in balance discussion at this point. Save your aesthetic ideas for later, unless it will end up affecting balance.
- Barrin+ Show Spoiler +
|
A design with this much thought in it needs to be tested before any legitimate bashing can occur.
At any rate, I think the bottom left and right expansions shouldn't have the cliff, and should be closer into the map to keep that whole bottom area wide open. EDIT: and to make those bottom expansions harder to hold, but once you do hold them you clearly have control of that area of the map and are most likely safe to take the center and maybe the other bottom expansion.
IMO, you should also consider making the bottom expansion 7 or 8x HY Mineral (in the easy-to-harass formation like you have it now) with 2 gas, and put it on low ground.
I'd also experiment with making large sections of the map unbuildable. (Using the checkerboard technique I use on my maps like Fighting Spirit and Impervious)
EDIT 2: As for hostile neutrals, this isn't fucking wc3
|
This map looks like it is 20% done, get it to 80-90% before you post it.
|
At any rate, I think the bottom left and right expansions shouldn't have the cliff, and should be closer into the map to keep that whole bottom area wide open. EDIT: and to make those bottom expansions harder to hold, but once you do hold them you clearly have control of that area of the map and are most likely safe to take the center and maybe the other bottom expansion. Yeah I have been making them harder and harder to hold each time I open the editor lol. I will push them in though I like that idea. I will see how I can make the mains look without that cliff too.
IMO, you should also consider making the bottom expansion 7 or 8x HY Mineral (in the easy-to-harass formation like you have it now) with 2 gas, and put it on low ground. Im confused. You're talking about the 6 o'clock base? I am already going to make it high-yield, and it is already on low-ground, unless you mean making the ground around it higher :O
I'd also experiment with making large sections of the map unbuildable. (Using the checkerboard technique I use on my maps like Fighting Spirit and Impervious) I think I like this idea. I think I know where I will do it too.
EDIT 2: As for hostile neutrals, this isn't fucking wc3 :O :O :O :O
lol. ^^ I like to think of them more like destructable rocks that fight back. They should of course give more valuable areas to take over. But I am probably gonna steer clear of that with this map anyway.
This map looks like it is 20% done, get it to 80-90% before you post it. The layout is 95% done. Have you ever tried to decorate a map, only to have to move a few things around and need to spend twice as much time trying to fix it? That's what this map taught me.
Step 1: Layout Step 2: Scrutinize layout in every way possible. The help of friends is very useful. Step 3: Decorate.
It may not look very finished but trust me the layout is very well thought out, and that's the only piece that matters at this point IMO. I assure you I can decorate this map in a single swoop and you won't know what hit it. Check out my link above if you wanna see my decoration skilz >.< lol btw I know not to have that much stuff in one area for a competitive map.
|
Get rid of high ground cliffs around the main. Natural choke is way too big. Top expo has rocks...? Third is too hard to take. Why so many rocks in the middle... Wait, are there cliffs around the entire perimeter of the map? GET RID OF IT ALL. Now all expansions are tankable. No Gold in the middle = no incentive to take it. Even worse, theres tons of rocks "guarding" it. Change it to gold at least. You don't need two watchtowers (on the mounds), just one there. And no hostile units. THIS IS NOT WARCRAFT IN SPACE!! Also, you don't need watchtowers guarded by rocks. It's not marine arena.
/end brutality
EDIT: Ohmygosh! I'm a hydralisk! :O
|
I would add a watchtower to the top ground route unless I am just being dumb and don't see it.
|
Wow, rushing distance is really long. Also, as a zerg, I dislike this whole VARS Symmetry idea. Basically, I will always be expanding towards my opponent, because my ideal expo path will be symmetrical to my opponents, thus causing us to expand towards each other. This is great for a meching terran, but not so much for a zerg. Think about why Metalopolis is considered by many zergs to be a good map. On anything but close spawns, Zerg is able to peacefully take its half of the map. On a map like this, the Zerg will always have to play like it does on close spawns, except for the spawns aren't close.
On your point:
Map should encourage macro play. I completely disagree. This map also seems like it would be extremely anti-zerg imo, how is a zerg supposed to hold its 3rd? (Note: I don't agree with the map analyzer about the bottom right being necessarily the 3rd base)
|
Third is too hard to take. Thats not what ProdiG said? :O
Why so many rocks in the middle... To force you to take the other routes until late game.
Wait, are there cliffs around the entire perimeter of the map? GET RID OF IT ALL. Now all expansions are tankable. Oh no those are just to outline the perimeter of the map actually.
You don't need two watchtowers (on the mounds), just one there. I like this idea, however I was thinking about doing it to the northern ones instead. Hmmm
And no hostile units. THIS IS NOT WARCRAFT IN SPACE!! ;(
EDIT: Ohmygosh! I'm a hydralisk! :O GRATS
I would add a watchtower to the top ground route unless I am just being dumb and don't see it. There is purposely none there.The northern watch towers do cover the entrance/exits though. Maybe if I turned the two north towers into one I could have it cover that area instead though.
Wow, rushing distance is really long. Also, as a zerg, I dislike this whole VARS Symmetry idea. Basically, I will always be expanding towards my opponent, because my ideal expo path will be symmetrical to my opponents, thus causing us to expand towards each other. This is great for a meching terran, but not so much for a zerg. Think about why Metalopolis is considered by many zergs to be a good map. On anything but close spawns, Zerg is able to peacefully take its half of the map. On a map like this, the Zerg will always have to play like it does on close spawns, except for the spawns aren't close. VARS does not exclude a map that allows both outward and forward expanding.
I keep hearing things like that and I feel like I am gonna have to make a map to dispel each one lol.
In fact, I thought this map didnt do a terrible job of it. Your opponent expands north, you expand south, or vice versa. In fact I thought that's what truly warranted the middle gold expansion, just to give you a place to hold a very forward position.
I completely disagree. This map also seems like it would be extremely anti-zerg imo, how is a zerg supposed to hold its 3rd? (Note: I don't agree with the map analyzer about the bottom right being necessarily the 3rd base) I see what you're saying. I will be considering ways to help zerg hold their 3rd. Right now it is very easy for terran/protoss to hold thirds, but maybe not so easy for zerg. I am kinda dumb for not seeing this cuz im a zerg player lol. I was too busy looking at flanking opportunities I guess, this map has been widened up a bunch since it's early versions. By the way I think you guys might be surprised with how big this map actually is, which simply makes holding thirds and macroing easier IMO.
I think a 2-basing zerg can take some serious map control with fast mutalisks too, moreso than most other maps.
----------------------------------
TY FOR FEEDBACK. The map is asking if that's all you got though
It still needs a name too.
@ ProdiG you meant the two bottom thirds are too easy for protoss and terran to hold right? not necessarily zerg?
- Barrin
|
@ ProdiG you meant the two bottom thirds are too easy for protoss and terran to hold right? not necessarily zerg?
I meant they're uninterstingly easy to take for all the races as the flow of the game will have the players taking those bases towards the late-game stages, and having them tucked in like that on a wide map like this I don't think would work well
To everyone who says this map is "anti zerg"
Every map is "anti zerg." I've heard it on every one of not only my designs but in almost every custom map thread that exists. Stop being babies and learn to do things other than spam hydra/roach and 1a.
Your main-natural ramp goes down north, and not diagonally. This is very different from almost any other map, and is in tune with VARS. It takes an extra building to wall off this ramp, but it shouldn't mean too much because of the long rush distances.
Terrans are going to fucking hate you. In all seriousness, ramps liek that make baneling busts all the more powerful in ZvT. If that's a strategy you want abused on your map, then leave it. Otherwise change it~
Here's a part of the mapmaking guide that I started working on last week but since abandoned:
-There is no “There is no cow level.” Mapmaking in SC2 is very hit and miss, there is no single formula that will create the next Destination every single time. Players either like your map, or they don’t. The best you can do is examine what works and what doesn’t, try to come up with an interesting and unique design and hope that the community enjoys it.
EDIT: Oh yeah. I meant the six o'clock expansion should be low ground with ramps going downwards to get at it, just to make it even gayer to try and hold.
|
at first glance, it looks...bland....but I guess you will change that later since this is an early version
also, it is somewhat reminiscent of scrap station...
|
I don't think there should be rocks covering the top center expo. Seeing as you already need to break rocks to get there I think the extra rocks are redundant. On second thought that might be a bad idea because I think ever Terran player in the world would try to be clever and float a CC to that expo.
I personally don't think your tower placement is all that useful. There seems to be no tactical reason for taking the bottom two towers. Until late game it seems most of the fighting will happen in the north section of the map. The only reason I can think of even bothering with one of them is to check and see if he has the 6 o'clock high yield expo. But I'm not sure if you can even see that.
I like the positioning of the two northern towers more. But I don't like that they are completely cut off from early game use. I think you should switch the direction of the ramp and remove the destructible rocks. Either that or bring them down to low ground. That way they will at least be useful for checking up on your opponent as they leave their base. As they are now they are also a very scary place to put a couple of siege tanks.
I'm not sure if I like the rocks covering the third. I think it may make the third slightly more difficult to take than I would like. But it also gives you the option of taking the less defensible fourth instead.
Over all I think it is a cool map. I just don't like the positioning of the towers. I also think you may have gone a little destructible rocks happy.
|
-There is no “There is no cow level.” Mapmaking in SC2 is very hit and miss, there is no single formula that will create the next Destination every single time. Players either like your map, or they don’t. The best you can do is examine what works and what doesn’t, try to come up with an interesting and unique design and hope that the community enjoys it. This is all too true. I keep feeling like no matter what I do to my map there's someone who's not gonna like it. I keep thinking that there might be a series of key things that I am just not grasping, and if only I could implement them into my map it would be golden. But the more I map the less I believe that now. It is not possible to make a map that pleases everybody. But it's probably possible to make multiple maps to please everybody ^^ Gotta start somewhere.
Oh yeah. I meant the six o'clock expansion should be low ground with ramps going downwards to get at it, just to make it even gayer to try and hold. I like this. it's already on the lowest land possible, but I will raise the land outside of it in a way that should also help me make the third less defendable.
also, it is somewhat reminiscent of scrap station... I knew someone would see it :D But in practice it's a whole different ballgame, trust me.
-------------------------
One thing that I am not sure everyone considers when talking about base placement and how easy it is to defend is the glaringly simple fact that you're not always defending. How easy the opposing enemy's base is to attack is an important part of the equation.
I have had somewhat of an epiphany when it comes to siege tanks and chokes. I think that chokes and burrowed units have not been used to their full potential really. A choke gives you very good reason to bottle your units into that particular area. If you've ever dealt with anything resembling a trap, you'd know that a choke is a perfect place to set up an ambush. The key is to make the choke not too attached to your base, an important attack route, and not too small to be scanned with one scan.
|
I personally don't think your tower placement is all that useful. There seems to be no tactical reason for taking the bottom two towers. Until late game it seems most of the fighting will happen in the north section of the map. The only reason I can think of even bothering with one of them is to check and see if he has the 6 o'clock high yield expo. This is on purpose. They should actually be critical late-game. They are also good for looking for any counter-attacks if you push through the top.
But I'm not sure if you can even see that. You can.
I like the positioning of the two northern towers more. But I don't like that they are completely cut off from early game use. I think you should switch the direction of the ramp and remove the destructible rocks. Either that or bring them down to low ground. That way they will at least be useful for checking up on your opponent as they leave their base. As they are now they are also a very scary place to put a couple of siege tanks. I really wanted them to be cut off from early game use They are positioned too well for early game IMO. But yeah, most maps have more useful inital watch towers. I don't think it's a big deal though. People will just have to be a little more creative with their scouts. This also gives an advantage to zergs with overlords too btw. There's actually a lot of lovely places to put an overlord scout over this map, giving great map control. I doubt the person who said it's imbalanced against zerg paid attention to that.
I'm not sure if I like the rocks covering the third. I think it may make the third slightly more difficult to take than I would like. But it also gives you the option of taking the less defensible fourth instead. That actually is the 4th, according to the map analyzer. Honestly, I see it as an optional third. You have two thirds. Choose wisely. Do you progress towards your enemy's expansions? Do you pull away from them? Do you take the top which should be great if you go air, or do you want the more ground-friendly bottom?
I also think you may have gone a little destructible rocks happy. Yeah I'm still recovering from my last map. 4-player FFA map with 80 destructables lololol. Which ones would you take away? I REALLY dont wanna take away any of the ones from the center.
------------------
thanks for feedback <3
oh btw I forgot to mention beforehand that I am literally willing to do anything with this map. I am ready to nuke entire parts of it and rearrange almost everything, if you give me good reasons to. That's why it's not decorated yet.
I'm also almost ready to start churning out the next version of this map with the revamp to the lower section of the map. Still interested in hearing more stuff in the meantime though
- Barrin
|
I like the concept, but I think it kind of looks like a sad Cyclops o(
|
I like the concept, but I think it kind of looks like a sad Cyclops o( OMG LOL Oh man you should have seen some of the early versions. They looked like some fat dude with his arms and (4?) legs spread out. It was epic.
|
OP Updated with newest version. Many many small things were done. Please pick your bashing hammers back up and start swinging.
|
All I will pitch in, is that if the jellybean shaped piece of empty space below the semi-island was a little smaller, it would really open up the bottom of the map for Zerg. Those lategame "corridors" (3) just beg to be stormed.
Personally as a Zerg player, I would avoid those corridors like the plague. I just wish the map had a little more open space, Zerg don't really have any units anymore to be effective at controlling ground space.
|
Spawns look way to close imo.
|
All I will pitch in, is that if the jellybean shaped piece of empty space below the semi-island was a little smaller, it would really open up the bottom of the map for Zerg. Those lategame "corridors" (3) just beg to be stormed.
Personally as a Zerg player, I would avoid those corridors like the plague. I just wish the map had a little more open space, Zerg don't really have any units anymore to be effective at controlling ground space. I think you were looking at the old version. Updated OP to make it harder to mistake that.
Spawns look way to close imo. Really? The map is probably a LOT bigger than you think it is. It has extremely long scores for spawn distances from the map analyzer. It's a big map.
|
Very solid, I like it alot.
Looks very BW style (great), great use of space and movement paths, would def play this one.
|
|
|
|