|
ESV Serpent Sands
Published on NA, EU, and SEA
By TImetwister22
V 0.1
Concept
I decided to take a swing at a rotational symmetry map that made room for several styles of play to be strong under certain conditions. Thus, depending on spawn locations and the expansion pattern of you and your opponent, certain styles would be stronger than others.
Analyzer
+ Show Spoiler +
Playable: 148x148
Aesthetics
+ Show Spoiler +Shakuras and Mar Sara tilesets
Aesthetic Pictures
+ Show Spoiler +
Features
-All positions enabled
-High ground third overlooks central bases, making room for harass if your opponent takes central expansion.
-Xel'naga tower overlooks entire center, but cannot see the central bases. Side paths can be used to avoid being seen.
Change Log
+ Show Spoiler +
As always, feedback is more than welcome 
|
I looked at it and I thought I opened the thread of TPW Vulture.
|
The map seems good, but it feels like spawning counter clockwise is stronger, given that if both have a third, the counter clockwise player has a smaller choke.
And the map as a whole feels chokey.
|
I was immediately struck by the chokes in the middle, but the map is alot larger than it seems.. Looks good.
|
Once again he shows Haven's Lagoon was no fluke! I'm really impressed how much you improve with every map you release. Top notch map!
|
On February 11 2012 03:07 AdrianHealey wrote:
I looked at it and I thought I opened the thread of TPW Vulture.
Probably because it's not a 2 player map.
|
How does it play out with the thirds? It has striking similarities as the 12 base maps like Twilight Peaks and Burning Altar which were dismissed due to the far third. Rush distances in close spawns seems a little short as well even though it is more acceptable on a 4p map then a 2p map.
Anyways I hope the issues are just worries and plays out a lot better cause the map looks awesome. The simple and beautifull design is very appealing and I have to agree with Johanaz here, you have in an incredibly short time become one of the best map makers. Thumbs up!
|
|
|
United States10381 Posts
i feel like the third is a bit too far from your natural to take comfortably. also, there is no real alternate 3rd if you get bad spawn locations.
EDIT: But overall, it's a great map.
|
On February 11 2012 04:08 Barrin wrote:This map has a lot going for it. The only thing really to flesh out is any kind of positional imbalance. For those who don't know what that mostly entails, I'm mostly talking about this area in close positions: + Show Spoiler +To put it in a simple way: who owns those two bases? Does one person own them more? Is that counteracted by the probability and strength of the other person getting them instead? So.. well, is it imbalanced on this map? It's particularly hard to say in this case. There's actually just so many factors... it's a little silly. From what I can tell it seems well within an acceptable range of balance. Mostly what I mean is that all of the factors seem to diffuse each other... and even if they don't exactly, there's just so many of them that it seems that the better player will usually be able to win. -- Btw there's some really sick manipulation (variety) of openness, "dots", and chokes. I like it tbh :D
What you mention here is the magic of this map. If close spawns, the map will play like a 12 base map until late game, where players will fight to the death over the remaining, yet highly contested, four bases. Cross positions, the map will play a lot different, as I'm sure you know
On February 11 2012 04:00 Archvil3 wrote:
How does it play out with the thirds? It has striking similarities as the 12 base maps like Twilight Peaks and Burning Altar which were dismissed due to the far third. Rush distances in close spawns seems a little short as well even though it is more acceptable on a 4p map then a 2p map.
Anyways I hope the issues are just worries and plays out a lot better cause the map looks awesome. The simple and beautifull design is very appealing and I have to agree with Johanaz here, you have in an incredibly short time become one of the best map makers. Thumbs up!
I wouldn't really say this is similar to either of those maps at all actually. I suppose the layouts are kinda similar, but not really. The thirds actually play quite well, and if a certain race is struggling to hold them just narrowing the ramps would help a ton. Being that they're only three creep tumors away to comfortably connect to the natural, zerg doesn't have a big issue dealing with stargate.
Close positions, most people just tend to take the third away from their opponent, cross positions they tend to take the one along their main first, then the further one as their fourth. If it makes it to 5-6 base late game, some zerg say they don't mind taking one of their mains/naturals as their 5th, but terran and toss with either take the central base below their third or fourth. Haven't seen a game yet were it goes beyond 5-6 bases.
|
I really, really like this map. I like how the center isn't just a big open blob but it has those chokes and then the more central bases hold the more open areas. I like how there's fairly little spawn imbalance (pretty easy thirds on each side). I like the new, fun take on the 4p rotational map. A lot of great stuff. Great work.
|
really like the style you got cooking, it might be a little chokey for my taste in the middle though.
|
This looks really cool, although I also think that it might be a little chokey as well, perhaps you could widen the middle by making the 4 high ground cliffs in the middle smaller? Not the ones around the Xel'naga, but the ones near the middle expansions... Also how do the high ground cliffs near the Xel'naga affect holding it? I think I like it, cause you can't really park your army there...
|
On February 11 2012 14:26 Pocky52 wrote:
This looks really cool, although I also think that it might be a little chokey as well, perhaps you could widen the middle by making the 4 high ground cliffs in the middle smaller? Not the ones around the Xel'naga, but the ones near the middle expansions... Also how do the high ground cliffs near the Xel'naga affect holding it? I think I like it, cause you can't really park your army there...
Depends on your situation. The player with the xelnaga can see over the LOS blockers, while the other can't. However, that really only applies to early to mid game before medivacs, observers, and colossus. What the chokey middle does do however is it allows the central bases to be taken. Parking your army in front of the base but right outside that very central area with the xelnaga forces your opponent to march through that area if they want to engage. Which I might add, not the best idea for the aggressor unless they're taking advantage of some flanking or multi-prong attacks.
As for shortening those cliffs you're talking about, the Xelnaga tower currently sees the entire middle area. So if you go through the middle, the tower will see it, guaranteed. If i do shorten these cliffs, there will be a little space where workers, lings, zealots, etc could sneak through without being seen. Not something I would particularly desire, but it wouldn't be the biggest of issues.
|
The thing that I'm most concerned about is what Barrin said. Those bases will be highly contested, yes, but what if a terran manages to get a PF down on, say, the top base fairly early?
On Entombed Valley, if a terran gets the centre-bottom base in close-by-ground spawns as his fourth, the zerg is pretty screwed because he is constantly getting his own third (if you get the natural third) assaulted and sieged from the comfort of the PF.
I feel that if you grab the top base, you can siege up and grab the low-base as well, giving terrans an edge, esp vs zergs (and other terrans). I might be wrong, but it seems that you could hold the space between the third and nat with little problem as you slow-pushed with pfs into your opponents base
|
There doesn't seem to be a good place for flanking anywhere on the map. The whole map is a choke point :/
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
Please use the TL Upload function - your Analyzer pics don't get rescaled to page width.
|
I agree with Barrin's anlysis of the positional imbalance. Really nice work timetwister. ;D
And I'll get on the wagon with everyone else that this map is just cool and inspiring and very likable. My favourite part is how many interesting choices you get in cross positions and how different that is from the adjacent spawns. This is the first 4player rotational map I've seen that I can say with certainty is worth playing a lot to find out if it's balanced. Things like TPW Artifice don't count because it dilutes the rotational factor until it nearly goes away.
Regarding the chokes, I think it's a little anti-zerg but it's the right choice for the map and it will probably be fine if the zerg handles it properly. It creates a bit of a mono-path funnel when pushing to the inner bases, but the watchtower defrays that nicely and you have plenty of loop around for a flank. The counterattack option is more difficult than usual though.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
This is one of the best 4p maps I've seen in a while.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
If this gets published on EU I'll be playing the shit out of it, untill then I just have to applaud, this map seems awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QP3P2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vSZqx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J5tG1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hoodM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BXbiM.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4Ex9K.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IkSU7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0xpb0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2hjmG.jpg)
