|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TiX6H.jpg)
Made by: Mieszko
Bounds: 144x144
Spawns: 4 (No restictions)
Available: EU
Symmetry: rotational
Bases: 16 (12 standard, 4 "half" bases")
Lately theres been a large influx of 2 player maps. Which is why i decided to go back to the rotational 4 player concept. However i wanted to add something "new" to the concept (read: new to starcraft 2 ), a backdoor blocked by stacked minerals instead of rocks.
Overview
+ Show Spoiler +
Analyzer
+ Show Spoiler +
Additional information
(Image heavy)
+ Show Spoiler +Base layout![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/16XAt.jpg) 1. Main.• Size 28.6cc • No airspace behind minerals 2. Backdoor.• Blocked by stacked minerals • Each patch contains 10 minerals, stacked 4 times (old: 5 patches/5minerals each) • Unbuildable "bridge" to prevent warp-ins • Highground unpathable ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/K32kj.jpg) Picture explaining the mineral block (Now stacked 4 times)3. Backdoor expansion• 6minerals 1 rich geyser (highlighted by green omni light) • Only unblocked entrance 1x sized ramp • Large ramp towards the middle, blocked by two destructible rocks (4x4 sized) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/D4Qiw.jpg) picture showing the backdoor expansion4. Natural• Small natural • Lowered supply depot preventing pylon/bunker blocks on the main ramp • Highground unpathable • 1x1 building blockers behind the mineral line, shown in the picture below. These were added to mitigate some of the problems caused by the 2x1 sized minerals. (bunker placements) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NPczq.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hNtYO.jpg) 5. Middle• Large open middle • L-shaped highgrounds unpathable • Line of sight blockers ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uo9vT.jpg)
Alternative version
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lHTTE.jpg) Overview of the backdoor expansion• Small ramp removed • Dual 4x4 destructible rocks replaced by huge destructible rock No other changes to the rest of the map.
|
United States10578 Posts
I feel that if you are going to do this, you should have low mineral counters, like 100 on the minerals at the backdoor so that you can take a decently easy to take 3rd should you spawn lets say at 8 and opponent at 11.
unless u make spawns cross.
|
Does the backdoor expand really need the mineral block, destructible rocks and small ramp? I prefer your alternative version. Or perhaps rocks on your small ramp and just normal pathable cliff where the destructable ramps are now.
Otherwise, I really like the style and aesthetic 
|
Definitely very unique, but executed generally pretty well. A very interesting and fun map. Good work! =D
|
Some nice touches you included, like the single ramp for sending a worker to build your backdoor 3rd before you have the rocks or minerals down.
I would just use doodads to block pathing if you don't want those spots to be bunker-able. Otherwise it's just a bizarre red square in the build grid when a player tries to place something.
Along the same lines, I would use some kind of visual indicator on the unpathable spots -- the L blocks in the middle and the unbuildable bridge. Rocks, small rocks, bricks, %size reduced temple rubble, some of the sunken rubble in a textured mound, anything like this would help a lot. It might not be your first aesthetic choice, but I would also be really heavy handed with the textures to make it as clear as possible. Bumpy rocks on unbuildable, clean grass/dirt at the nearby buildable zone, and a sharp line of demarcation to indicate where the zone changes.
You should also change the mineral patches to be of a quantity larger than one worker can harvest at once. This is because it only takes 5 workers and one right click to open a small hole in the mineral wall as you now have it. This is way too easy for allowing someone access to the main for harass (say... DTs) or an all-in (marauder hellion) coming from the ccw adjacent position. If each patch had 10 minerals you would need ten workers and a few seconds of micro to open a small gap. That might not even be enough of a cost of entry.
+ Show Spoiler [sigh] +On February 05 2012 09:08 FlaShFTW wrote:
I feel that if you are going to do this, you should have low mineral counters, like 100 on the minerals at the backdoor so that you can take a decently easy to take 3rd should you spawn lets say at 8 and opponent at 11.
unless u make spawns cross. read the OP
I also think the rocks on the backdoor 3rd should be a single unit. I think it might be too much of a burden for zerg in certain cases to waste time on 2 rocks when they just want the damn thing open.
You of course have a bit of expansions imbalance in adjacent positions, but I think the 4th makes up for this (mostly). It also really depends on the matchup how the players might deal with the asymmetry. For example in ZvT where the zerg is SE and the terran is SW, the zerg can take the 3oclock as their 3rd, even fast 3rd, and it looks like only 4 creep tumors to connect via the backdoor. This way they avoid getting tank pushed on their 3rd from below the cliff, and they can fill in that base as their 4th later or keep expanding up the right side. So I really like this aspect of options.
Another thing I notice is that (in the same hypothetical TvZ spawn situation) aggressively expanding towards your opponent is relatively very safe, easy, and absurdly strong if successful. Imagine taking the backdoor 3rd, then pushing down towards the zerg and putting a PF as your 4th at the 6 oclock base. It's like the same syndrome as center bases (a la Xel'naga Caverns) but even better and even easier. A big factor here is the chokiness of the base, though I don't know if it's worth it to change that.
For above two reasons, I would recommend changing the clockwise 3rd option to another 6m1g base, so the map would have 8 normal expos and 8 small expos. (The bases at 12, 3, 6 and 9.) This would help alleviate the positional imbalance because both players would have a 6m1g 3rd base in adjacent positions, as well as a 6m1g 4th base. It would also take away the economic incentive of expanding toward your opponent.
Very nice and clean execution of the concept though, good work! I really like the nothing fancy, solid feel to it.
|
your Country52798 Posts
Can protoss warp past the mineral backdoor?
|
wouldnt those mineral blocks favor zerg and terran a lot more? Zerg can just throw down a macro hatch and terran can just lift in order to get closer to the minerals
|
Each patch contains 5 minerals (stacked 5 times)
If I understand this correctly, there's only 80 minerals here?
|
EU always gets the most interesting maps...
would love to try on NA, it looks great.
|
Thanks alot for the comments, there are some information about the mineral block under "additional information". However the ammount of minerals in the block is not set in stone, it's something that would need testing, alot of testing. i could see myself doing what EatThePath recommended and increasing each patch to 10 minerals. The thought behind the block is that it should be a potentional attack path if you sacrifice some economy (workers) but not be powerful enough to be the only option in close spawns.
Regarding the building blockers it's something i will try to highlight in a better way (very important), i wasn't able to do it in a way i was pleased with so far, i will work on it. The highground not having anything indicating that they are unpathable is not a huge problem, i think. They are so slim that i think it will be self explanatory.
As of now i don't really want to replace the dual rock with a single one, first i'd like to see what the extra protection to the expansion can provide in a PvP with only 2 small ramps to protect.
If theres anyone willing to upload this on NA, please PM me.
|
You can still blink over the mineral wall. So blink allin without obs might be pretty strong. Something to think about.
|
On February 05 2012 19:24 Ragoo wrote:
You can still blink over the mineral wall. So blink allin without obs might be pretty strong. Something to think about.
Thats an issue i have thought about, however if it gets scouted it's quite the commitment if the attacker blinks in. Also, this is one of the reasons i wanna keep the ammount in the mineral block to a minimum. If you scout the blink tech it should be easy to break down one patch in the blocker and move a sentry over. Sure, this would require the defender to cover two ramps, but they are in close proximity to eachother.
Everything comes down to if i can get some decent testing of the map.
2) Why no LoS blockers ? It will fix both the blink and warpin problems.
Warpin is not an issue with the building blockers in place and LoS blocker wouldn't solve the blink issue since you can blink through LoS blockers.
|
Hey man, nice map you got there :D.
Just a few points I wanted to add :
1) 28.6 CC main is quite low : you might want to make it a little bigger, else it's going to be annoying to play on for toss/terran.
2) Why no LoS blockers ? It will fix both the blink and warpin problems.
Other than that I love the feeling of the map, I don't remember a map with the same ambiance.
|
Small update:
• Improved visuals indicating unbuildable ground (backdoor bridges and unbuildable patches at the naturals)
• Backdoor mineral block changed to 10 minerals each patch, stacked 4 times (old: 5 minerals each patch stacked 5 times)
If anyone decides to test the map (still only up on EU) i would love if you could send me the replay.
|
United States10578 Posts
|
On February 05 2012 16:34 fenix404 wrote:
EU always gets the most interesting maps...
would love to try on NA, it looks great.
Amen. Looks cool, but I refuse to play it until its on a server I could play it off of. :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bPruZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/W0I3W.jpg)
