[M] (2) Manala

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 07 2011 15:17 GMT

Hey guys,

this is Manala, a 2p map with reflectional symmetry, intended for competitive play. It will be one of my maps I submit to the TL map contest

Version 1.0 up on EU
[image loading]

Map Size: 132x128
Tileset: Char (with some bricks) without lava

+ Show Spoiler [Angled View] +

Analyzer images:

+ Show Spoiler [ analyzer images] +

+ Show Spoiler [Overview] +

analyzer confused nat and third..
+ Show Spoiler [nat to nat] +

Some ingame shots:

+ Show Spoiler +

Johanaz

Denmark363 Posts

October 07 2011 16:09 GMT

Love the bloodwork

I also like the layout, quite original and I think it´ll play well.

If I were you though, I´d reshape the cliff a little between the two ramps, possibly make the Tower plateau a little smaller and move the larger ramps a little towards the towers. Just to make that area a little more interesting. I feel the central low ground is just a long corridor with not much going on.

As always I speak from intuition

feel free to disagree.

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 07 2011 16:29 GMT

On October 08 2011 01:09 Johanaz wrote:
[...]I feel the central low ground is just a long corridor with not much going on.

Hm I think what's going on there right now is that it's the quickest path but also most open, lowground and no watchtower.

I had a watchtower there in a previous version (and barely couldn't see if the other tower was activated which was also cool) but I think it might make the middle too boring. Like 'herp derp, I'm gonna 1a through the middle and grap that middle watchtower'.

edit: I might make the tower highground smaller/push it back tho like you suggested to emphasize that even more so thx

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

October 07 2011 22:45 GMT

This is probably one of the best VARS maps I've seen on this thread. Not a lot of maps use this symmetry right now, so your competition is kind of limited, which is good.

Some expansion issues that may come up is that Zerg's safe third better not be able to be dropped, and the problem with safely taking expansions on these types of maps in general is that as you expand, the further you have to extend your army to be able to cover all of your expansions. You could narrow the center pathway a little bit more to make decisions much more important on where to attack as an alternative to making the map larger.

Something you might want to experiment with is the width and overall map size. I strongly believe that maps with this type of symmetry can be larger than most other maps without becoming imbalanced, if made correctly.

I really like the texture work so far, and I'm expecting some good doodad work and maybe a lava-waterfall from you!

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 07 2011 23:45 GMT

Thx

I will definitely consider removing that cliff on the third or move it to the fourth instead, will have to think about it.

As I said before I'd rather want to make the middle more open right now and I'm quite pleased with the size atm.
I don't want to make it much bigger than most 1v1 maps atm cos I really want to make a solid map this time... one that's not gimmicky or too risky (meaning nobody rly knows how it plays out).

Btw I think I have to disappoint you about the lava-waterfall ^^ I try to go for a melancholic underworld theme, probably won't use any lava

FlaShFTW

United States10106 Posts

October 08 2011 02:08 GMT

Really reminds me of Ride of the Valkyries.

very cool map. Though I think that 12 deserves to be a gold. It's gonna be so much into the action.

terran has it really easy on this map, as they can expand toward their opponent with tanks and completely demolish using the top lane. Problem with that is you leave your nat open, but you can find a way to defend.

SmashHammer

United States148 Posts

October 08 2011 03:04 GMT

I really like the layout on this one and the aesthetics are coming along nicely :D I'm not sure about the placement of the gold though. It only seems viable as an early secret expansion because in order to defend the overlooking high-grounds the defending player would have to position their army really close to the opponent and away from their other bases. Also just a thought, have you considered changing the XWT to be accessible from the central 'mid' pathway instead of the high-ground pathway? I think it would make attacking through the center a better option in addition to opening up an earlier flanking route.

EDIT: or perhaps don't even have rocks between the high-ground and middle pathways.

idea in picture from --> + Show Spoiler +

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

October 08 2011 03:55 GMT

The best part about this map is the watchtower in its current form. That will be the center of every game, and it will create a lot of interesting situations when someone is trying to push across the map.

That cliff above the 3rd will sort of force zerg to go mutas in ZvT, which is not uncommon and probably the frequent choice with the accessibility of the main to air harass, but still I'd prefer if there were options like ling/roach infestor, which would be awesome on this map too! You could add a ramp up to that cliff from the 4th to provide a way for zerg to deal with drops there without mutalisks.

The gold base is sort of hard to make use of, but I think it's okay. It'll be there for those 5% cases where it has to be used, or for some reason the game allows it to come into play, and there's no harm because it adds to the blank space and doesn't obstruct anything.

This is a great layout!

TheAmazombie

United States3714 Posts

October 08 2011 08:03 GMT

On October 08 2011 01:09 Johanaz wrote:
Love the bloodwork

feel free to disagree.

I agree with this mostly, at least just looking at it. I will have to try it, but I love the idea and design quite a bit. I am actually quite excited to try this.

Samro225am

Germany982 Posts

October 08 2011 10:23 GMT

#10

Great decision to remove the second XWT. Play or watch some games to think about cliffdrops. Would be bad to have four easy expansions.

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 08 2011 10:45 GMT

#11

I will see what I will do about the cliffdrops, maybe I'll just try to have the cliff so small and accessible that you can easily defend drops with roaches.
Other than the cliff I think the third and fourth are quite easy for Zerg so I guess I want to keep the cliff.

About the gold: If one player (probably T or P) tries to turtle on 3 or 4 bases on the top and ignores the bottom, the other player (especially Zergs) can try to punish that behavior by grabbing the gold. So yeah I think it's useful. Right now it can be sieged from the middle tho, which I will probably change.

As I said before about the tower placement, it's not in the middle so you don't just 1a through the middle.
Also in the early game if you try to be aggressive you can either go the shortest way through the middle but then the enemy can potentially see everything you do with the tower, or you go around/kill the rocks which takes more time.

@FlashFTW Yeah that base is pretty close to both players but as you said top lane is terran territory so I don't want to give them a gold base there as well ^^

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 08 2011 11:54 GMT

#12

Updated the OP

Changes:
- increased map bounds by 4 at the bottom
- now there are two seperate cliffs at third and fourth at the bottom; the cliffs are so thin that tanks can always be hit by roaches; marines can not always be hit but I guess then it's a little bit of micro until the spine roots to take care of the drop

- decreased the size of the watchtower highground
- middle pushed up a bit, now tanks can only hit workers that mine the 2 middle gold patches making it annoying but not impossible to mine from the gold when the middle is sieged
- fixed pathing

Further balance concerns are very welcome!

edit: I will push up the ramp at the top third a bit up, so that they third area is more open (Zerg has easier time to attack it and also defend pushed going through there).

Macpo

453 Posts

October 08 2011 12:36 GMT

#13

I don't know nothing about maps, but this one looks definitely original and nice!

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

October 08 2011 20:06 GMT

#14

This map reminds me of Golgotha, but prettier.

tokicheese

Canada739 Posts

October 08 2011 22:15 GMT

#15

I think a problem would be if a terran were to push straight across and PF the close 3rd and the fourth using tanks to slow push. I guess ling run bys could work but with a few bunkers left at home with a tank it would become really hard to do any damage.

Praetorial

United States4241 Posts

October 09 2011 00:41 GMT

#16

This map looks great and has a unique dynamic that has not yet been exploited in most mainstream Starcraft 2 maps. Great work!

Ragoo

Germany2773 Posts

October 28 2011 15:53 GMT

#17

Updated description and pictures in OP to Version 1.0!

Enjoy and feel free to comment! I will submit this to TL contest.

edit: Mods please remove the "WIP" thx.

iGrok

United States5142 Posts

November 10 2011 23:41 GMT

#18

This looks like a solid map. I like it! Base-hugging expo could be awesome (Pfort mech pushes)

LunaSaint

United Kingdom620 Posts

November 11 2011 01:02 GMT

#19

Mmmm, this is looking tasty and unique. Would really love to see how it plays.

Antares777

United States1971 Posts

November 11 2011 02:57 GMT

#20

On this map, the gold expansion looks very balanced. That is something that has become more and more clear and apparent in recent maps. I like how you still included the gold base even though a lot of people are abandoning them altogether. I especially like the location of the Xel'naga Tower and how you have two blocked ramps that lead up into it. It's a very unique concept that I have not seen before. Not a lot of maps use this kind of symmetry, which would make Manala stand out, but there are so many cool features worth noting.

You have a very good contrast between choked areas and open areas. The upper paths are the quickest routes and also the most choked up routes, with the lower routes being longer and more open. There is a clear option for the third base, both with their owns risks. One of them hugs your natural and is near the choked region, the preferable third for a Terran or Protoss player. The other extends downward onto lower ground from the natural and lies in the more open region of the map, but can be dropped for harassment. No matter which expansion you pick, there is at least one more expansion available to move toward without switching direction. Because of how the split works with three expansions in the north (one contested) and five in the south (also one contested), you won't be able to keep expanding in a relatively reasonable way in the same direction, forcing you to switch directions and take an easier base. Eventually there will be a point where the third hugging the main will be safer than an expansion in the southern half of the map. I really like all of the decisions that players will make while playing on this map.

Another thing that I always enjoyed watching was when players abused the gap between the golds on Metalopolis. It had a very high spectator value, and your gold seems like it could replicate some of those scenarios in an entirely different map!

I really like this, great job!

1 2 Next All

Please or register to reply.

[M] (2) Manala

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming