|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fld6j.jpg)
TPW Elder Roots v.1.3
Made by Icetoad and re-textured by Mereel
Published on : NA/EU
Map bounds: 144x134
Map Overview:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cm1KF.jpg)
Introduction:
+ Show Spoiler +It's been a while since I haven't made a map, since Althea, in which there was I find a concept flaw in it. So for the pass couple of month, I was trying to make a map with a good concept. It took a while and while I was searching for a good layout I stumble upon a BW map called Eros Route. Easily we can see that porting it 1:1 would play terrible in sc2, so I decided to try to take the key concept of the map that could be taken and use it. In the first version of the map it resemble a lot the BW version, but it changed a lot since now. Why did I like this concept? Well I really liked how the pathing of the map played out, going to the nat was in a ''S'' form and how if you want to go the fastest way possible you had to take a choky path and you could get easily ambush. If you wanted to be more safe you had to go on the high ground, but you had a longer way to reach the opponent. This was really the key concept I liked about this BW map. Sadly, with comment and play testing I had to make the 2 high ground connect.
Angled View:+ Show Spoiler +
Analyzer:+ Show Spoiler +
(Note: in the analyzer image the tower sees less because the range of the tower are of 20 not 22)
Specific Area of the map:
+ Show Spoiler +Main: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wmdtO.jpg) Natural: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zt9Fe.jpg) Third: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2F60Q.jpg) Forth: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/660D2.jpg) Fifth: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Cb2if.jpg) Middle: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/q0tEC.jpg)
Aesthetic details:
+ Show Spoiler +Texture used:+ Show Spoiler +Aiur small brick
Korhal grass
Korhal dirt
Port Zion dirt
Port Zion grass
Aiur Rock
Tarsonis Rubble
Cliffs used:
Aiur Manmade Cliff
Haven Organic Cliffs Bel'shir lighting
Change log:
0.9
-Making it official public on TL.
v1.0
-Changed lighting to Bel'shir, I had many people complaining about Igrok lighting of Poizone.
-Reduced the LoSB number and nah acts more like aesthetic vegetation.
-Removed the Highest High ground on the ovi spot where you can FFE. Also changed a bit the doodad near it.
-The high ground hook on top of the open space of the nat is reduced. (Changed suggested by a176)
I hope you go play the map and like it. Please share any worries about possible Imbalance.
1.1
- Added path restriction on reaper path where there was some imbalance because Terran could drop tank on the high ground that way sieging a part of the main.
- Added the TPW tag.
1.3
- Changed the Natural layout, choke is 3 3x3 building
- Main was slightly reshape
- Layout was slightly changed
- Map completely re-textured and dooaded by Mereel (some small change of my part)
|
Canada6688 Posts
im glad to see some maps with spawns in the middle. theres alot of potential in this map, i like alot.
criticisms;
remove all the LOS blockers
im a little concerned about the middle area, the chokes are a bit on the small side, and the higher cliff protrudes just a tad too close to the enemy base for me. you could probably move them over a bit (maybe 3 ~ 4 squares) without totally messing with the overall look of the map and giving the defending player a bit more room to manoeuvre.
|
that is an awesome map. really got that bw feeling i think. the only thing i dont like all that much is the texturing work, but thats just a personal opinion, everyone has their own style.
things i would change:
- remove the little highground in the natural choke, make it 3gateway blockable with rocks on the side
|
I'm not really a map maker, but a lot of advice I see given is the ramp from main to natural. I would love to be corrected here, but shouldn't the ramp face the natural instead of looking past it? Here's a picture of what I mean: WARNING: These are not EXACT corrections, but more me just trying to explain an idea. I'm not sure where the ramp would go exactly, this is just placement advice relative to the natural.
+ Show Spoiler +
So you could do your ramp either way in my opinion, but I could be wrong. The arrow to the left is leading straight to the natural as you see - this has a small disadvantage to the arrow on the right because the ramp is still a little open to intrusion, where as the arrow on the right faces it away from any incoming attacks, giving you small time boost before they can get to your ramp.
I think this is also to help the player get their natural more easily by either blocking off, or being more easily able to defend both the ramp and the natural. I feel like your setup is a lot like Abyssal Caverns (among other blizzard maps) where you're forced at an early point in the game as zerg to defend either the natural or the ramp.
Like I said, I could be wrong here and I'm just asking based off my experience on playing other maps and reading other map maker's comments.
Other than that though, I like it quite a bit. Someone mentioned above how awesome the spawns are in the middle, and I didn't even realize that other maps didn't do that! haha.
EDIT: I'm not sure if I explained myself well enough, so I hope you understand.
EDIT #2: Also, I realize that you would probably have to do some adjustments to the main and the choke leading to the natural, but I'm not a map maker so I have no idea what you would do to fix that if you were to change the ramp. Sorry! :/
|
Canada6688 Posts
On January 03 2012 05:48 hoby2000 wrote:I'm not really a map maker, but a lot of advice I see given is the ramp from main to natural. I would love to be corrected here, but shouldn't the ramp face the natural instead of looking past it? Here's a picture of what I mean: WARNING: These are not EXACT corrections, but more me just trying to explain an idea. I'm not sure where the ramp would go exactly, this is just placement advice relative to the natural. + Show Spoiler +So you could do your ramp either way in my opinion, but I could be wrong. The arrow to the left is leading straight to the natural as you see - this has a small disadvantage to the arrow on the right because the ramp is still a little open to intrusion, where as the arrow on the right faces it away from any incoming attacks, giving you small time boost before they can get to your ramp. I think this is also to help the player get their natural more easily by either blocking off, or being more easily able to defend both the ramp and the natural. I feel like your setup is a lot like Abyssal Caverns (among other blizzard maps) where you're forced at an early point in the game as zerg to defend either the natural or the ramp. Like I said, I could be wrong here and I'm just asking based off my experience on playing other maps and reading other map maker's comments. Other than that though, I like it quite a bit. Someone mentioned above how awesome the spawns are in the middle, and I didn't even realize that other maps didn't do that! haha. EDIT: I'm not sure if I explained myself well enough, so I hope you understand. EDIT #2: Also, I realize that you would probably have to do some adjustments to the main and the choke leading to the natural, but I'm not a map maker so I have no idea what you would do to fix that if you were to change the ramp. Sorry! :/
normally the nat would be positioned so that you can do FFE for protoss. but he added an 'overlord pod', that piece of raised terrain that overlords can hover over for vision. it also acts as a choke for the FE buildings. for zerg in particular, creep tumors need to be spread towards the ramp anyways, so when the creep starts getting on the lower terrain, you can place buildings there to wall off in the same manner.
its a good observation, but this is just a different style of map. zergs cant be as passive in defense on this map, yes just like abyssal, but that isn't a bad thing 
|
United States10247 Posts
I like this map, though it leans towards 5 base splits...
however i like the base layout and locations. look to see this in GSL soon.
|
@a176
Why should I remove the LOSB? I find it adds a bit of game play attention to your unit and makes ambush stronger. Also concerning the high ground thing, I'm trying to see if I should do that change. Only more testing will show if I should.
Also about the natural you well explained the ramp thing. Right now to fully wall-off you need 1 forge+1gateway.
@Mereel
I think you dislike the texture of the highground? Because this is also the area I dislike and I want to work on it.
|
Canada6688 Posts
i dont really see the need for them on the map. the paths are pretty narrow as is, and you have those raised terrain(s) scattered around the map, so vision is already reduced in that manner. they are just extra and unneeded punishment for both attacker and defender
|
I really like a lot about this map. It's just really neat. The more I look at it I just get this little fuzzy feeling inside.
Some things I especially like:
A lot of the cliff and ramp and layout work is just brilliant. It's new and vogue and exciting, but still great proportions. As examples: the forked ramp in front of the third is really cool, and the parallel high ground and low ground in front of the fifth. The plateaus with the fourths on them and the central spine of high ground is well designed in general, and aesthetically appealing.
The aesthetics in general are beautiful imo, very simple in some spots but just stunning. Then again I'm a sucker for omni lights... but even the texturing seems very well done. Just dandy.
Although, I don't think the watchtowers are really necessary. The gameplay works fine with them as they are, but I think they could probably be removed... up to you.
Overall, a really, really cool map.
|
|
|
@a176
I will remove some LoSB, but I want to keep some random scattered around the map that way giving it a bit more vegetation in term of aesthetic.
@RumbleBadger
The tower were something I had a hard time deciding where to put it because I feel that the map would work without tower, but the map has to much attack path to not have towers.
@Barrin
Barrin we can't always make fun maps and I was aiming this time for a solid map.
Change log v. 0.10:
-Changed lighting to Bel'shir, I had many people complaining about Igrok lighting of Poizone.
-Reduced the LoSB number and nah acts more like aesthetic vegetation.
-Removed the Highest High ground on the ovi spot where you can FFE. Also changed a bit the doodad near it.
-The high ground hook on top of the open space of the nat is reduced. (Changed suggested by a176)
Most of the image should be updated.
|
Nice work sir , cool concept (not sure if its new, havent been around much ) , middle spawns ftw!
Path leading up and down from spawns might be a little too long without anything there...
|
I'm really curious to see how this layout plays out, it looks awesome.
|
@ihasaKAROT
Well the path I find is okay and the problem is that I could never add a base in the middle, since it would be so close.
@FoxyMayhem
Well you can go test it and see how it will play out :D
|
On January 03 2012 06:11 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 05:48 hoby2000 wrote:I'm not really a map maker, but a lot of advice I see given is the ramp from main to natural. I would love to be corrected here, but shouldn't the ramp face the natural instead of looking past it? Here's a picture of what I mean: WARNING: These are not EXACT corrections, but more me just trying to explain an idea. I'm not sure where the ramp would go exactly, this is just placement advice relative to the natural. + Show Spoiler +So you could do your ramp either way in my opinion, but I could be wrong. The arrow to the left is leading straight to the natural as you see - this has a small disadvantage to the arrow on the right because the ramp is still a little open to intrusion, where as the arrow on the right faces it away from any incoming attacks, giving you small time boost before they can get to your ramp. I think this is also to help the player get their natural more easily by either blocking off, or being more easily able to defend both the ramp and the natural. I feel like your setup is a lot like Abyssal Caverns (among other blizzard maps) where you're forced at an early point in the game as zerg to defend either the natural or the ramp. Like I said, I could be wrong here and I'm just asking based off my experience on playing other maps and reading other map maker's comments. Other than that though, I like it quite a bit. Someone mentioned above how awesome the spawns are in the middle, and I didn't even realize that other maps didn't do that! haha. EDIT: I'm not sure if I explained myself well enough, so I hope you understand. EDIT #2: Also, I realize that you would probably have to do some adjustments to the main and the choke leading to the natural, but I'm not a map maker so I have no idea what you would do to fix that if you were to change the ramp. Sorry! :/ normally the nat would be positioned so that you can do FFE for protoss. but he added an 'overlord pod', that piece of raised terrain that overlords can hover over for vision. it also acts as a choke for the FE buildings. for zerg in particular, creep tumors need to be spread towards the ramp anyways, so when the creep starts getting on the lower terrain, you can place buildings there to wall off in the same manner. its a good observation, but this is just a different style of map. zergs cant be as passive in defense on this map, yes just like abyssal, but that isn't a bad thing
Ahh, I see. So my suggestion was because I'm a bad player - haha. I don't usually have creep spread to my natural by then so I was thinking only from MY point of view, but I could see that if a good zerg player was on this map, they would be able to block off quickly. I still question whether or not they would have enough time from when the first tumor was down to be able to spread fast enough to block off the ramp, but I will do some tests because I can only theorize so much.
Thanks for the response! I appreciate it.
|
Thanks for changing the lighting! I don't know why, but it felt kinda scary to me. (No disrespect to Igrok, it was really original, but I guess I simply wasn't used to it)
|
Canada6688 Posts
On January 04 2012 00:38 Icetoad wrote:
@a176
I will remove some LoSB, but I want to keep some random scattered around the map that way giving it a bit more vegetation in term of aesthetic.
theres some doodads you can use, i believe its called jungle brush, underbrush, jungle plants, or something of that sort.
|
On January 04 2012 09:56 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 00:38 Icetoad wrote:
@a176
I will remove some LoSB, but I want to keep some random scattered around the map that way giving it a bit more vegetation in term of aesthetic. theres some doodads you can use, i believe its called jungle brush, underbrush, jungle plants, or something of that sort.
What I meant by vegetation was vegetation in the middle of the map that wouldn't affect pathing and that would look a bit like long grass in a plain.
|
Change log:
1.1
- Added path restriction on reaper path where there was some imbalance because Terran could drop tank on the high ground that way sieging a part of the main.
- Added the TPW tag.
|
your Country52797 Posts
Taking 5 bases looks really easy and could lead to split map scenarios.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tg2tU.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dp6P1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gpLBY.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aGdzf.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i317.photobucket.com/albums/mm378/theinsidetheory/TSG3Uedit.jpg)
