|
This is Harmony, I'd like to say it's my first map, but it's not, it's just the first one that looks like a good map lol 
Version 1.1 has been released and published to B.net. Search "Harmony" to play!
Overview 1.2
+ Show Spoiler +Bases are labeled. Red boxes represent LoSBs. Black circles are DRs. Blue circles are XWT sight range. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1pyTQ.jpg)
Change Log
+ Show Spoiler +Version 1.1
-Re-textured the dark grass edges to smooth it out and improve the aesthetic value of Harmony.
-Moved XWTs so that they do not give sight into the mains.
-Raised the Fourths up a level and raised a wall behind the naturals.
-Added Trees/Doodads to the outsides of the map.
-Removed pathing on the outsides of the map.
This is pretty much a cross between Steppes of War and Destination, probably the worst choice of two maps to combine into one, but I think I pulled it off. The destructible rocks in various location force the earliest and quickest path to the enemy to be the longest one. As more and more rocks are destroyed, the map plays like its true size. The 3rd base requires you to mine out two mineral fields, each with 20 resources in them to open up the quickest path between the main and the 3rd. You can expand there before the minerals are mined, but you most likely will not be able to defend it if your expansion gets attacked.
For those who like pretty maps, you should not be disappointed with Harmony.
Leave feedback please. I need to know whether or not I'm heading in the right direction from my previous map Illusory Garden.
~Feedback is greatly appreciated!~
My Map Thread
|
Atleast it's pretty damn beautiful!
|
On December 17 2010 06:18 goldfishs wrote:
Atleast it's pretty damn beautiful!
Thx! I guess I'm getting the hang of aesthetics for this stuff. Now, if anyone can explain lighting...
|
I dont like how many destructable rocks there are in the map, but until ive played it i wont know for sure. hell, it could turn out like red faction 
|
On December 17 2010 06:41 WniO wrote:I dont like how many destructable rocks there are in the map, but until ive played it i wont know for sure. hell, it could turn out like red faction
Is red faction a map? I'm not familiar with it.
|
Q: are there 2 open entrances to the main? Hard to tell from picture.
Also, I would blend the dark green edges a bit more.
|
On December 17 2010 06:42 Antares777 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2010 06:41 WniO wrote:I dont like how many destructable rocks there are in the map, but until ive played it i wont know for sure. hell, it could turn out like red faction Is red faction a map? I'm not familiar with it.
Red Faction is an old first-person shooter that showed off a little technical gimmick of the time known as destructible terrain. The gameplay basically emphasized digging paths through rock to advance.
|
Oh, that's interesting. If Harmony flows like that, I bet it would be an exciting map to play on. I need to test it though. I'm going to upload it to B.net when I'm done with pathing (right now anyone can walk on those cliffs that are clearly out of bounds) and probably a bit more aesthetics.
|
On December 17 2010 06:52 iGrok wrote:
Q: are there 2 open entrances to the main? Hard to tell from picture.
Also, I would blend the dark green edges a bit more.
There are indeed two entrances. One is blocked by two mineral fields, each with twenty resources, the equivalent of 8 mining trips for a worker. This backdoor is supposed to function like Destination's.
Oops, I guess I put the dark grass on too high of an increment. That will be fixed sometime soon.
|
I guess player would like two take your "fourth" at their thirds. But over all looks good. For other comments I should have played on it so maybe in in the next time i'll find some time for it. 
|
What Miragee said. The natural is very vulnerable once the rocks have been broken, so I would take the 4th as my third, and then I can easily take the '3rd' whenever I want.
|
On December 17 2010 07:28 Miragee wrote:I guess player would like two take your "fourth" at their thirds. But over all looks good. For other comments I should have played on it so maybe in in the next time i'll find some time for it.
Yeah, I just got this image up so that I could get some feedback on whether or not this is a step in the right direction after Illusory Garden. I'll get this on B.net asap.
EDIT: Now on B.net. Search "Harmony" to play!
|
I would get rid of the destructible rocks in the center. With them in there the map looks way too tight.
|
On December 17 2010 08:45 PH wrote:
I would get rid of the destructible rocks in the center. With them in there the map looks way too tight.
Really? I thought that without them the rush distances would be way too fast and Zerg would be at a huge disadvantage. What if I just changed the middle so that the ramps on both sides were smaller? Then only one DR on each ramp would have to be destroyed, making it easier to open the ramp up? Or maybe to open it up I could just remove the high ground in the middle. That's what I probably will do because that is just taking up space.
I'm only thinking about it and don't plan on changing anything until I get feedback from people who have played on it.
|
On December 17 2010 07:01 aisight wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2010 06:42 Antares777 wrote:On December 17 2010 06:41 WniO wrote:I dont like how many destructable rocks there are in the map, but until ive played it i wont know for sure. hell, it could turn out like red faction Is red faction a map? I'm not familiar with it. Red Faction is an old first-person shooter that showed off a little technical gimmick of the time known as destructible terrain. The gameplay basically emphasized digging paths through rock to advance.
Yay Red Faction! I loved it back then, but I played it again one or two years ago and apart from the destructible terrain it was really bad. 
Concerning the map: Your choice of textures is better, but you have to spend more time with texturing. Don't just draw a rim of dark grass on every cliff you find with a hard brush. Hard transitions don't look good. Use a softer brush and vary the size of said rim. Same thing is applicable to the doodad placement. Don't let the trees stand in a line. Vary the density, and hold shift to place them freely.
Light grass doesn't look good next to dark grass, mix both together a bit.
|
Keep the rocks - it adds a nice dynamic in the game.
|
On December 17 2010 11:20 Koagel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2010 07:01 aisight wrote:On December 17 2010 06:42 Antares777 wrote:On December 17 2010 06:41 WniO wrote:I dont like how many destructable rocks there are in the map, but until ive played it i wont know for sure. hell, it could turn out like red faction Is red faction a map? I'm not familiar with it. Red Faction is an old first-person shooter that showed off a little technical gimmick of the time known as destructible terrain. The gameplay basically emphasized digging paths through rock to advance. Yay Red Faction! I loved it back then, but I played it again one or two years ago and apart from the destructible terrain it was really bad. Concerning the map: Your choice of textures is better, but you have to spend more time with texturing. Don't just draw a rim of dark grass on every cliff you find with a hard brush. Hard transitions don't look good. Use a softer brush and vary the size of said rim. Same thing is applicable to the doodad placement. Don't let the trees stand in a line. Vary the density, and hold shift to place them freely. Light grass doesn't look good next to dark grass, mix both together a bit.
Thanks for your feedback, I'll update this with new and improved textures sometime over the weekend. Do you have any feedback concerning gameplay?
|
On December 17 2010 11:49 Antares777 wrote:
Thanks for your feedback, I'll update this with new and improved textures sometime over the weekend. Do you have any feedback concerning gameplay?
Well, I'm mainly the graphics guy, but if it was my map, I would get rid of the rocks in the center or use less but longer rocks to block the ramps.
|
The distance between bases is already far great than Steppes of War, so you don't need those rocks in the center to give a reasonable rush distance. But I think the map is much better with them, because each one of the four actually plays a very big role in the local terrain there, and if both are up, that is a major difference for the entire flow of the map. They make the towers much more interesting. I don't think the rocks on the outside pathways around 5th are necessary though.
I like the mineral blocked back ramp. I would agree you succeeded in a curious merge of Steppes and Destination. I think you could also come up with something that looks very different that fits that description, but I like this one. The way it evolves as the game goes on is cool. I would say this is a large improvement on core concepts over Illusory Garden.
The towers should be scooted back towards the center. Aesthetically, it's weird they reveal a little of the main, unless you wanted that. If you do, it can let you blink in with mass stalkers without any air vision, which is pretty brutal.
I would also raise the area for the labeled 3rd up a cliff level, just so you don't have those double ramps on either side. It's not that big of a deal, though. But it would also be truer to Destination, where drops / walkaround behind the natural were a major part of the game. Come to think of it, it'd be cool if the natural had two ramps down towards middle, mimicking the bridges on Desti. (But at least one should be the size you have now, otherwise it's way too choked up.)
Nice work.
|
On December 17 2010 15:34 EatThePath wrote:The distance between bases is already far great than Steppes of War, so you don't need those rocks in the center to give a reasonable rush distance. But I think the map is much better with them, because each one of the four actually plays a very big role in the local terrain there, and if both are up, that is a major difference for the entire flow of the map. They make the towers much more interesting. I don't think the rocks on the outside pathways around 5th are necessary though. I like the mineral blocked back ramp. I would agree you succeeded in a curious merge of Steppes and Destination. I think you could also come up with something that looks very different that fits that description, but I like this one. The way it evolves as the game goes on is cool. I would say this is a large improvement on core concepts over Illusory Garden. The towers should be scooted back towards the center. Aesthetically, it's weird they reveal a little of the main, unless you wanted that. If you do, it can let you blink in with mass stalkers without any air vision, which is pretty brutal. I would also raise the area for the labeled 3rd up a cliff level, just so you don't have those double ramps on either side. It's not that big of a deal, though. But it would also be truer to Destination, where drops / walkaround behind the natural were a major part of the game. Come to think of it, it'd be cool if the natural had two ramps down towards middle, mimicking the bridges on Desti. (But at least one should be the size you have now, otherwise it's way too choked up.) Nice work.
Yeah, the rocks on the outside of the 5ths are not really needed. I put them there to make the rush distance shorter, because without them, I felt that players would use those side paths, and potentially walk past each other, if you know what I mean. I'm going to test the actual in game rush distance with comparison to Steppes today, so I'll be 100% certain.
You're absolutely right, those towers should be repositioned. When I first placed them, I was like "oh it's just a tiny bit of the main" but now I see how much that can change the game.
Hmm... I could raise the thirds up a level. I never noticed that before.
Expect a new version by tomorrow at the latest.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
