There is no Thread for this Map so i thought i make one. Remade Textures and Reshaped everything. I made that a long time ago and still improved it.

Design Influence:
+ Show Spoiler +

General:
+ Show Spoiler +

Texture: MarSara
Playable: 136x136
Expands: 12
Xel'Naga: 4

Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +

HQ: http://i.imgur.com/hzDbA.jpg

AnalyzerOverview:
+ Show Spoiler +

Analyzer:
+ Show Spoiler +

Pictures:
+ Show Spoiler +

upperbound

United States2300 Posts

December 20 2011 23:18 GMT

I very much dislike that the watchtowers can see someone's army standing in the natural, and taking a fourth seems pretty damn difficult. It's weird that BW maps seem to never translate to SC2 macro maps, and this one doesn't seem much different.

kedarking

Netherlands98 Posts

December 21 2011 00:04 GMT

On December 21 2011 08:18 upperbound wrote:
I very much dislike that the watchtowers can see someone's army standing in the natural, and taking a fourth seems pretty damn difficult. It's weird that BW maps seem to never translate to SC2 macro maps, and this one doesn't seem much different.

Agreed, this map has waaay too few expo's to actually work out as a good macro map imo.

Yoshi Kirishima

United States10366 Posts

December 21 2011 00:20 GMT

If both players spawn at the bottom for example, does the bottom right player take the third that is to the left of his main or the base above his natural?

Some are saying it's too hard to expand on this map, I don't agree. The way the map is lets you easily counterattack if they attack, so you can both take lots of bases. They won't be safe bases, but it should encourage a lot action (counterattacks, harass, etc.)

If you're spawning cross positions, it is interesting because which base you pick as your third will change the pace of the game, especially coupled with your opponent's decision. If you both pick opposite thirds, then the one with the "closer" third can play the aggressive role, while the one who took the other third (the one blocked by rocks) can easily take his "closer" third as a fourth. Or the one who took the closer third can play defensively and take his fourth as well.

But if they both take their "natural" thirds, then the way they split up the map could be the opposite way (vertically instead of horizontally).

Chargelot

2275 Posts

December 21 2011 00:21 GMT

I don't recall Mereel saying this was a macro map. I like it, very well designed, nice looking, textures work really well. The watchtowers are pretty close to the natural, so they could use some repositioning. Overall, really nice map that can produce strategies which aren't quintuple expand before pylon (exaggeration obviously).

RumbleBadger

322 Posts

December 21 2011 00:45 GMT

There's a lot of great things in this map, namely the sweet aesthetics and the cool center (I really like the whole effect the center has on the map, and when I say center I mean the ramp structure as well as the long thin holes that branch off).

One problem though: in non-cross spawns one player gets a really easy third, and one gets a really hard third if the rocks are broken down, and a 2 base push to break the rocks and deny the third would allow the clockwise player to take an uncontested third and stop the opponent from expanding anywhere else. Unfortunately that fact alone kinda breaks those spawns for me at least.

I really like a lot of stuff about the map, but the positional imbalance makes it... well... not one of my favorites.

Gfire

United States1699 Posts

December 21 2011 00:50 GMT

I think I'd rather if the thirds were pushed out towards the edges further, and the rocks removed, with the path hopefully being long enough for the rush distance. This would be a bit like Calm before the Storm, with no backdoor bases of course. If you use high ground around the natural like in the original, you can reduce the amount of wasted space, while making less positional imbalance, by centering that third between the two naturals. It would also give a little more space to widen the ramps in the middle, I think.

Edit: I think the LOSBs around the watchtowers really make things worse for the defender. The attacker can see the watchtower from the highground, or can see past when holding the watchtower, but the defender has to walk all the way up to it, in range of the high ground, in order to shoot down any units there. It just makes it that much more difficult for the defender. I think having the watchtowers there at all is a little questionable, but I think if you keep them you should remove the LOSBs. Never really been a fan of putting them around watchtowers in general, it never made a lot of sense to me.

johnnywup

United States3858 Posts

December 21 2011 01:04 GMT

sick, i loved that map in brood war. :D

nalgene

Canada2153 Posts

December 21 2011 01:25 GMT

He didn't copy the map 1:1 ( There's flying spaces on the sides of the map instead of 90% ground and 10% air... )

The second map looks like 55% ground and 45% air...

He added rocks and and the unnecessary watch tower...
The second one has almost no room in the main base... ( above the bottom left one ) compared to the bottom left on the original...

and the paths seem too thin compared to the original one with wider paths...

FlaShFTW

United States10348 Posts

December 21 2011 01:35 GMT

#10

i liked the thirds being more into the sides than this and without the rocks :/ with a spawn set of lets say bottom bases, left has an advatnage because his third is farther from his opponent and not blocked by rocks. if right wants to be safe, he'll need to take 3 o clock but its blocked by rocks so its harder to defend.

digmouse

China6330 Posts

December 21 2011 02:22 GMT

#11

Visually very well designed, but balance wise as suggested above, it's quite frustrating to take third on certain spawn locations, maybe foce cross/vertical spawn?

SkimGuy

Canada709 Posts

December 21 2011 02:34 GMT

#12

The translation took all that was unique about this map - The fact that your strategy differs depending where you spawn relative to your opponent (which reflected in the paths between you and your opponent being longer/shorter and wider/narrower.

Doesn't look like it changed over in this map, as all paths look the same :/

Zariel

Australia1288 Posts

December 21 2011 02:57 GMT

#13

You had a good idea, but there are a few things that I REALLY don't like.

1) Watchtowers: Get rid of all of them. It makes the map too 'turtle'. If you really do insist on having watchtowers, have one in the middle

2) With the destructible rocks, make it so that there is a narrow pathway initially that can be broken down so it becomes bigger. For the first 5-8 minutes, there is literally only 1 way in and out. Alternatively, just get rid of them completely.

3) The third seems to be very 'packed in' to the map, I rather have it slightly pushed outwards more to make use of the empty air space

To OP: When you make a map, you have to consider the structural balance against all spawn locations. Otherwise, map will be crap no matter how beautifully you made it.