|
LQ Overview
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RWPtq.jpg)
+ Show Spoiler [Analyzer] +
Specifications:
2 Spawnlocations
12 mineral bases
-main has 8 patches
-natural has 8 patches
-expansions have 8 patches
00 gold bases
00 Xel'naga Towers
Size: 136x144 playable
Notes:
The two thirds have the same distance from the natural. The ramps are facing in a respectivly similar angle towards the third.
Natural-Natural distances are ~108 game units
Takes 1 creep tumor to connect main to natural.
Feedback is always highly appreciated.
You can catch me on irc in #teamliquid @ quakenet.
cheers,
madsquare.
other maps:
Exe9
BBQ
Amnesia
Ice Wastes
Beta Station
Sapphire
Emerald Plateau
Dreamscape
|
1. Three player rotational always impress me. I hope that one day I'lll find the curage to make an attempt at one.
2. Simple yet cool layout. Textureing also simple but on the other hand clean and very easy to read. Personally, I prefer a mix of textures, which coudl still be done without loosing readability (Blistering Sands for instance, or your own Amnesia).
3. The foruth is a bit too accessible to the third for my (personal) taste. I think it would be more dynamic if those were more neutral and moved out ffrom the map centre a little (and further from the third, at somewhat equal distance from the righthand player's nat).
4. The third looks to be easy to defend from main with tanks ... might be unbalanced, OR it muight just give T some tendencies towards taking it as second with the distance as a trade-off - which might be just fun.
5. I do think an XNT in the absolute middle would add to the fun also. There would still be viable paths around it.
6. Do you got non-flying zones at the edges of the map to make the flying space equal to all players?
7. Published on EU?
|
United States10281 Posts
simple layout is quite the work of art.
the bases are all nicely spread out and i love how you took out a bit of land to separate them, really nicely done.
now go doodad xD
|
Looks really good! I have a couple more minor concerns with it though-- note that none of this is personal, just trying to help your mapping.
The entire mains can be sieged, which is a real issue in all MU's, especially TvT. Some maps are kinda impossible to avoid it though, like this one. Overall though, it shouldn't be too much of an issue because the tank spots are right in the attack lane outside your natural. In the future, its just something to try to avoid.
The 3rd and fourth expansions look really similar.. on the ideal map, every expansion is really unique and feels different to take. On your map, the 3rd and 4th are on the same level, have the same mineral/gas count, and have the same openness (albeit the 3rd is against the main). This typically leads to sort of 'meaningless' expansions, and results in more boring games. Again, this is just something to keep in mind for future maps.
The last thing is that it looks really nice right now, but I think there could be more with the tileset. I suggest working on some more doodads, and maybe adding some more texture contrast if you have any more you can add.
|
Second thoughts often manifest that your first impression was your very best.
First impression: Beautiful. Clean. Minimalistic. Melike!
|
I love this!
Best 3 player i've seen in SC2, though the distances are very short it can be fixed by stretching the map. Great job so far! 
|
Nice map. Good and simple. If you aren't planning to, use the height tool to make you natural terrain look more natural. I'm sure you are though 
|
On March 08 2011 06:53 SaltyDog wrote:Nice map. Good and simple. If you aren't planning to, use the height tool to make you natural terrain look more natural. I'm sure you are though
But then the ground moves when you build on it?
|
I'm a fan. Clean and functional. Because of all the ramps from the high path to the low expansions, they will have a lot of character in a game situation because of the positional importance the players give them. What I mean is, if you were watching a game, you would see in the placement of troops and buildings what the players' posture was, imbuing them with notable properties. Aka, player A feels like he's overextended (even though it's so close) and he's very worried about a flank / side attack, but player B acts like it's clearly his territory, combined 3rd/4th. Every game will be different. I hope you see what I mean.
Nevertheless, if you wanted to spice it up, I think LOSB between the lowground bases would be cool. =)
|
Where's your signature square?!
:O
|
Very nice map. The bareness of the textures is actually a pleasant change from the current norm.
The only thing I'm worried about is how close the third and fourth are. Seems like if you manage to take one out, you are guaranteed to kill the other. Maybe you could increase the crack between them? or put up a treeline?
I'm also wondering about the rotational balance. Seems like it would be advantageous for zerg to be clockwise of their opponent, so they are always expanding away. If they were counter-clockwise of their opponent, they will have a harder time holding their third.
|
On March 08 2011 10:27 Antares777 wrote:
Where's your signature square?!
:O
It's in there, it's REALLY hard to see though.
|
On March 07 2011 21:45 Meltage wrote:
I do think an XNT in the absolute middle would add to the fun also. There would still be viable paths around it. Im against giving players free map control (i.e. watch towers with no 'special' purpose), but I will see how it plays out.
On March 07 2011 21:45 Meltage wrote:
Do you got non-flying zones at the edges of the map to make the flying space equal to all players Nope, since these are buggy. Theres some space around the mains, wich you cant see in the screenshots. Effective space is quite equal around all mains.
On March 07 2011 21:45 Meltage wrote:
Published on EU? Yes.
On March 08 2011 00:50 monitor wrote:
just trying to help your mapping. Thats very kind of you
On March 08 2011 00:50 monitor wrote:
The 3rd and fourth expansions look really similar.. on the ideal map, every expansion is really unique and feels different to take. On your map, the 3rd and 4th are on the same level, have the same mineral/gas count, and have the same openness (albeit the 3rd is against the main). This typically leads to sort of 'meaningless' expansions, and results in more boring games. Again, this is just something to keep in mind for future maps.
Thats a Layout specfic feature. One of the challenges of 3 player rotational symetry is the expansion layout. I decided to give players equal two thirds, so that they could always expand under same conditions.
If you expand clockwise, your fourth will be (one) third of clockwise main. If you expand counter clockwise, its a third of the counter clockwise main.
That feature requires them to be equal. Its side effect and feature in one. But I feel, in this case its a good thing overall.
On March 08 2011 10:27 Antares777 wrote:
Where's your signature square?!
I recently decided these should blend in more with the environment. So its there but less visible
cheers,
madsquare.
p.s. should I stop answering to all replys in one post resulting in a large amount of text, instead take them in smaller portions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/r1tDj.png)
