|
Bel'Shir Marquee
Made by: TheFish
Published on: [NA]
Version 1.3 Published on NA
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J0ZAQ.jpg)
This and many other maps I've done can be found in my Public Dropbox Folder!
Feel free to publish them to another server. Just include my name as the creator.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/anfef86n90z6711/ckZ5BIXL8P
Introduction/Inspiration:
Its an attempt at making a balanced 2v2 map.
My thought process going into the layout was to create the opportunity for players to actually expand, with each expansion requiring the team to control more of the map. I think the layout overall discourages some of the worst types of play we are used to seeing in 2v2 - one base all-ins, ganging up on one teammate etc. The natural area has destructible rocks to make it a bit harder to straight up rush, but also provide an opportunity for early aggression, as you can open up 3 paths to attack a fast expanding enemy team. That brings me to my point about spreading out some of the action, because there are many attack routes with chokes, I hope it will encourage splitting up the army and draw the game across multiple engagements rather than one deathball clash.
The aesthetics are pretty conservative, I want the map to be accessible and straightforward while still hopefully introducing some new gameplay elements to 2v2s. There are some LOS blockers and the watchtowers are not overlooking the main attack paths, but hopefully still provide map awareness - especially against the threat of drops in the main, which I think may be quite strong on this map.
Pictures (Aesthetics) (outdated):
+ Show Spoiler +
Pictures (Analyzer) (Outdated - main bases are slightly smaller and the rush distance should be ~4 seconds shorter)
+ Show Spoiler +
Data (Gameplay)
Playable Bounds: 170X152
Number of Starting Positions: 4
Number of Bases: 16
Number of XWT's: 2
Number of Rocks: 2
Main Choke <-> Main Choke Distance(s): 187
Nat Choke <-> Nat Choke Distance(s): 167
Mineral/Gas Counts: 8m2g
ChangeLog
+ Show Spoiler +Version 1.3 - Moved main base ramps slightly closer to the middle - Moved both start locations slightly closer to main ramp - Republished as a custom map, not Arcade Old Version (1.2) + Show Spoiler +- Front door rock-blocked ramp has been repositioned slightly to increase defender's advantage. - Main base size reduced slightly to reduce the effectiveness of blink-ins and drops - Reduced the playable bounds from 178X152 to 170X152 Old Version (1.1) - + Show Spoiler +
Feedback is welcome as always!
|
Not bad at all. Clearly, it's harder to judge the balance of a 2v2 map, but I think this looks pretty good, and is certainly a good deal better than maps like Tyrador Keep. Looks cool, I like the center too, and although you went with Bel'Shir mixed with Haven(a pretty safe combination imo), it looks nice, in a simple way.
On a side note, gotta love the analyzer image for a 2v2 map. (Hey bro, your base is in the way of my natural expansion!)
|
those bases in the middle low-ground north and south need some work but looks really solid otherwise.
|
like this one a LOT for 2s
|
I'd definitely prefer this over any in the ladder pool. The layout seems really good.
Feels pretty open, but that might be needed since there are essentially twice as many units at any given time. It's probably fine.
|
OMG FOURTH BASE IN A 2V2 MAP !
You're my hero :O
|
From the looks of it, this map is better than anything in the current 2v2 ladder pool. Looks like something where you can actually try and play a macro game on :3
|
On May 08 2012 02:51 RageCommodore wrote:
From the looks of it, this map is better than anything in the current 2v2 ladder pool. Looks like something where you can actually try and play a macro game on :3
That doesnt really mean anything though, we all know how anything besides 1v1 is a rush-fest 95% of the time.
That being said, still looks a little small to me, especially to have a 4th for every person. What is the overall size of this map? EDIT: NM, found the size. I do indeed think its just a tad small, again, especially to have 4 bases for every person.
|
Figuring out the size is one of those things thats kind of hard to judge. On the one hand, I want teams to have the chance to defend their naturals, but on the other, I don't want rush distances that are very long. Hopefully those rocks help to strike a balance. The overall proportionality is supposed to be on the open side of things, but I don't want to overdo it either. To strike a comparison, the map is slightly skinnier in size to Tal-darim Altar, which is 176X176.
I think 16 bases is a good number since its the high watermark for the number of bases in 2v2 ladder maps right now.
Thanks all for the positive feedback ^^
|
Its a good start, but isn't the main ramp a bit small? The natural seems quite wide, so it might be hard to defend, while the main seems to be super easy to defend, which is kinda awkward. Even though I can't really tell by just seeing the image.
Another thing is, if a Zerg starts at the inner base, it would be a bit bad, since he can't creep spread to his natural, on the other hand if a Zerg is in the outer base it will be even worse, since it would be much harder to block the ramp, maybe you should put another ramp near the inner main?
Besides these things this map looks decent, I can't wait to play it when you publish it in the EU (if you want me to publish it for you there I can you help with that  ).
|
Canada5565 Posts
Wow, this looks really good. There are very few 2v2 maps that I like right now.
|
On May 07 2012 07:28 TheFish7 wrote: I think the layout overall discourages some of the worst types of play we are used to seeing in 2v2 - one base all-ins, ganging up on one teammate etc
I like this map a lot, I think it'd be a great map to play 2v2 on.
I just wanted to ask what's wrong with playing a certain way, any way you can imagine. There is no WRONG way to play. But a map should always allow a player to continue taking bases and with proper scouting hold off that "1 base allin" that's so blasphemous, in the case of ganging up on one teammate or the other, that's just basic strategic common sense. So in this particular example, you would want to create a map that allows teams to "fight together easily" which is a basic defensive strategy. I basically just don't want you writing off strategies because you think the game shouldn't be played that way. A good map will allow cheese to work when not scouted, and cheese will be destroyed when scouted. A bad map would be basically any example of the blizzard 2v2 maps. So I applaud you, but just realize that those strategies are the very reason your map is good. And stuff.
|
@moskonia - The ramp at the main is a double ramp, which is used in alot of team maps. The ramp blocked by rocks is a triple wide, and the chokes at the main are 9 squares and 12 squares. I didn't want the main ramp to be too big, because then double 6 pool would be a huge issue, but its a pretty arbitrary size and I'm open to changing - I just used what I thought would work well. Zerg creep spread is a problem for a zerg that spawns at the inner base, but I couldn't see a solution without drastically altering the layout. In my original sketch there were actually 2 ramps to the main, but I decided to go with this because I never meant for the natural expos to be the ones closest to the enemy base. Another ramp might solve this, but it also might open up a whole other can of worms. I don't have an EU account so if you want to host it, let me know!
@thurst0n - All good points, I don't think there is any wrong way to play, my philosophy is that the map should never discourage "standard" play, and shouldn't encourage cheesy or gimmicky play. A well executed one base all-in should have a chance to work, provided the opponent fails to properly hold it off. the challenge as a map-maker is to create this environment where player skill is tantamount to unexpected gimmicks. As far as ganging up on one teammate, the ally should always have the chance to at least come to the aid of his teammate.
My hope for this map is to show that 2v2 maps with shared bases can have "standard-ish" expansion patterns where taking another base has proper risk/reward. The aesthetics are a reflection of the layout - in a sense its going back to basics. Hopefully I can tweak this layout (the disadvantage of spawning in the back esp. for Z and balancing drops is the main problem now imo) and come up with a more interesting version with more interesting aesthetics :-)
|
What I think, is when your in a 2v2, rocks might break to fast, since you got twice the army, therefore expanding is harder since the backdoor can be opened much quickly. Maybe you can fix this by stack 2 rocks on each other?
Actually my eye is pretty bad, I was sure the chokes were very big, but since it is a 9 and a 12 squares it means it should be pretty easy to expand as long as you watch over the backdoor's health. Even though, after all this is not 1v1, therefore builds that normally wont be able to do much damage can do ALOT of damage in a 2v2 situation.
Like lets say a Terran tries to go normal gasless expand, that build relies on bunkers in order to survive, but now with 2 entrances unless the Terran makes a shit load of bunkers his team wont be able to defend , since he wont have many units. Even if he builds 1 bunker at each choke, it still might not be enough, in order to be safe the terran would need to build most likely at least 2 bunkers at each choke, which is VERY expensive in the early game.
This is just one example of many, which of course is only theoretical since I haven't tried it yet but actually that is just metagame, that will develop in the future, after more maps like this get into the ladder instead of the crappy Blizzard maps that wont even allow for FE builds  For now 2 chokes + backdoor is a huge improvement, but I suspect that in the future the standard for the natural's choke would be 1 big ramp or 2 smaller ramps (maybe double ramp?).
|
On May 08 2012 02:38 ArcticRaven wrote:
OMG FOURTH BASE IN A 2V2 MAP !
You're my hero :O
Mine too, finally a map worthy of going into the 2v2 ladder. It reminds me slightly of War Zone, which was in the ladder pool in season 1 and 2 I believe.
As for balance, well testing is the only real way to see, it looks fine to me at the moment though I personally would favor 2 rocks blocking 2 of the 3 entrances instead of the one you have now.
Keep it up with 2v2 maps, I'm tired of seeing all those superawesome 1v1 maps that I never play (because I don't enjoy 1v1).
|
your Country52798 Posts
On May 10 2012 05:00 Callynn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2012 02:38 ArcticRaven wrote:
OMG FOURTH BASE IN A 2V2 MAP !
You're my hero :O Mine too, finally a map worthy of going into the 2v2 ladder. It reminds me slightly of War Zone, which was in the ladder pool in season 1 and 2 I believe. As for balance, well testing is the only real way to see, it looks fine to me at the moment though I personally would favor 2 rocks blocking 2 of the 3 entrances instead of the one you have now. Keep it up with 2v2 maps, I'm tired of seeing all those superawesome 1v1 maps that I never play (because I don't enjoy 1v1).
Hmm, I should get back in 2v2 maps if all they require right now is awesome designs :D
Not a bad map, slightly concerned that large-scale battles are pretty difficult to have at any point.
|
It probably a pet peeve of mine, but I would prefer both players to be equidistant from the ramp. It's annoying to wall off for the player who spawns away from the ramp, especially for protoss players. I'll say fuck it, I'm not gonna bother to wall off, then promptly die to a 6pool.
Otherwise really good map!
|
On May 10 2012 05:49 Heh_ wrote:
It probably a pet peeve of mine, but I would prefer both players to be equidistant from the ramp. It's annoying to wall off for the player who spawns away from the ramp, especially for protoss players. I'll say fuck it, I'm not gonna bother to wall off, then promptly die to a 6pool.
Otherwise really good map!
The thing with a 2v2 map designed around longer play should also include a pretty long travel distance to make stuff like 6 pool nearly impossible to pull off. The other option is to double mirror the map to make 4 spawning locations per team instead of two.
Just won three more rush games in between posts btw, and calling it a night - it's boring and I wanna learn how to macro better.
|
On May 10 2012 05:29 TehTemplar wrote:
Hmm, I should get back in 2v2 maps if all they require right now is awesome designs :D
I think thats really all they need. You should!
On May 10 2012 05:49 Heh_ wrote:
It probably a pet peeve of mine, but I would prefer both players to be equidistant from the ramp. It's annoying to wall off for the player who spawns away from the ramp, especially for protoss players. I'll say fuck it, I'm not gonna bother to wall off, then promptly die to a 6pool.
Otherwise really good map!
I agree with this, I would also prefer an equidistant ramp, but couldn't find a way to really work with the layout how I wanted it. I was also thinking of doing 2 regular sized ramps, but I thought this would cause more problems than it would solve. I think the biggest issue with this map is that teams with PZ or TZ can kind of get screwed by their spawn locations - (if zerg spawns by the ramp walling off is a pain, and it hinders creep spread, and if zerg spawns in the back it really hinders creep spread - which sucks for getting your 2nd queen to you nat) however this is an issue in lots of ladder team maps atm. so even though I couldn't really improve that bit, its still not worse than ladder. My next project will certainly have an equidistant ramp - i think its somewhat necessary.
On May 10 2012 05:00 Callynn wrote:
Keep it up with 2v2 maps
Thanks dude, I am going to. The positive feedback is a great motivator ^.^
On May 10 2012 07:03 Callynn wrote:
The thing with a 2v2 map designed around longer play should also include a pretty long travel distance to make stuff like 6 pool nearly impossible to pull off. The other option is to double mirror the map to make 4 spawning locations per team instead of two.
I think 6 pool should be "possible" to pull off, just that a proper defense should stop it easily. finding the right rush distance is tough - here I gave players the opportunity to shorten that distance by breaking some rocks. I think 4 spawn maps could be really cool for 2v2, but as I don't have any layouts in mind right now. One thing I think map makers should experiement with more is having the nearby unused spawn be a natural expansion - the only map that does this is Magma Core but in my estimation it goes about it poorly.
|
How about this?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tb3ox.jpg)
This is an alternate layout for the first five bases. I've illustrated my idea for the top-right cluster. The outlying areas are unchanged. This way, the ramp is somewhat equidistant from both players, and the surrounding bases have strategic positioning. What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/a6JzO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lUU6M.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dA5Cs.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XN1Xo.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XM6tn.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pX3fD.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BVKoe.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HGHCH.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/h8Y6i.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PIw2i.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tk55L.jpg)
