|
EK Icecrown
Version 1.0
Map by EKCO
Published to NA (let me know if you want it on a EU/CN/KR/SEA)
Version 0.1
+ Show Spoiler +
Version 0.2
+ Show Spoiler +- Moved gold bases up towards center of map. - Improved trafficking to the lower expos. - Moved lower Xel'Naga Tower closer to epicenter. * We're looking at the distance between bases as players expand further and further (mid-late game) to see if added range between the 3rd, 4th and 5th lower expos will yield better relationships. It is worth noting that on conventional designs, as players expand past the 3rd expo, additional expansions put you in closer proximity to your opponent, wheras on Ribcage, the distance increases. ** We are noticing that early game pressure from hellions were a little on the weak side, and are re-evaluating the Main2Main rush times. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cDiphSq.png)
Version 0.3
+ Show Spoiler +- Standardized 3-base expo locations with optional defensive terrain modifications. - Removed main base destructible rocks.. Was a false-choice strategic error for lower-tier players without clear benefits. - Main2Main reduced to 56, down from 60. - Nat2Nat reduced to 46, down from 50. - Enlarged pathways between southern expos. - Split southern Xel'Naga tower to both sides to improve utility and frequency of use. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/F2GOIF8.jpg)
Version 1.0
- Added some stuff.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fQ2K0wJ.jpg)
Context A:
+ Show Spoiler +Testmap Ribcage is currently just that. No serious terrain work has been done on the map as of yet. If you play this map, let me know what you think of the layout (not the terrain) in this thread here.
So far, we've focused on making adjustments to mineral lines and combat zones to get the 'feel' of a ladder map correct, but further playtesting is needed to better understand mechanics of the map that may have been overlooked. Some terrain between ridges may be accessible to reapers, this will be cleaned up in a later patch.
The map is supposed to gravitate towards the bottom as the game progresses, where both teams can access gold expos that are relatively easy to protect or hide if not scouted early (we're trying to bring back gold expos for that late game pizzazz).
Context B:
Give it a spin with your friends and let me know what you think!
You can playtest it with us as well on Mumble at aeonofstorms.mumble.com:8896 (disclaimer: Master League+). PM RNG in Development (9pm-2am EST) to get hooked up.
Eye Candy:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jEHhr7m.png)
More Eye Candy:
+ Show Spoiler +
Size:
150 x 150 playable
Rush Distances:
Main to Main: 56s
Nat to Nat: 46s
|
I think you should remove the gold base and move the other nearby base to that location.
edit: I see you want to keep that. Then perhaps remove the other base.
|
We did switch the gold expos with the open area expo in a more recent update, since undiscovered gold expos leave a pretty nasty impression in games where they drive the pacing (ie: that puzzling effect you get when you're up against an opponent that seems to expo slowly, but has actually invested in getting rich mineral fields).
To me, the weakest part of the design seems to be the bottom-most area between the (current) two gold sites, since they receive very little traffic even in the midgame, unless a player aggressively expands south.
|
I'm assuming this is one of your first maps, and if that's that case I am impressed. This map shows a solid understanding of proportions, base distancing, and choke placement and sizing. It's a fairly good layout as well.
However, it's huge. 150x150 is way too big for this style of map. This size is capable of hosting a 4p map such as whirlwind. 60s main-main is longer than Taldarim Altar cross positions, which is 52sec if I recall correctly. Nat-Nat is at 50sec is also quite long, as 42ish seconds should be max. Generally speaking, a 2p map should be between 128x128 or 140x140. The respectable distance ranges between main-main is around 40-50 seconds, with the nat-nat wanting to be 30-45 seconds.
If your sizes are too big, as seen here, you begin to have really long rush distances that actually devalues scouting and greatly discourages any early game pressure plays or timing attacks.You want your map to be versatile enough so that way players can still be unpredictable.
You can easily shave off the area that is the bottom 4 bases, and then bring the mains 10 tiles closer together to achieve these reasonable sizes. Though, this will force you to rearrange some of your bases along the bottom, and you'll probably have to get rid of one or two.
|
haha i'd recognize that name anywhere
map author is maker of SOTIS in the arcade
|
Yeah this is my first try at a melee map. Thanks for the compliments!
SotIS was rebranded to AoS (Aeon of Storms) some time before HotS, it's cool that people still recognize my long-form username 
The mapsize was one of my concerns as well, considering Ribcage is designed with 1v1 in mind.
Part of the reason for the size was that we had started with an approximation for Main2Main at about 58-60 seconds using the larger 1v1 tourney maps like Whirlwind (~56-58s)* and Cloud Kingdom (~58s). The horizontal mapsize was then increased to augment the goal of making a map that is mirrored across the vertical axis.
*Estimating that Whirlwind is 160x160, uses relatively same start locations, travels across the diagonal of the map, whereas TM Ribcage is 150x150, and travels across the diagonal of the map (albeit with one ~90-degree turn).
We'll test reductions to the Main2Main rush times and see how it goes. Our zerg players had a blast with the map size (maybe disproportionately so) since they had so many attack vectors.
There are several things I'm considering testing individually:
- Making it easier to expand south. This will explore setups where expos have comparable (or maybe even superior) tactical advantages in serving as a production site (proxy or otherwise).
- Reductions to Main2Main rush times.
- Reductions to vertical map size. This makes it so that a larger percentage of the map is being accessed, but reduces player options past the midgame. I figured it would be interesting to see a map with flexible attack vectors that develop well into the later stages of the game, thus the abundance of destructible terrain and focus on relatively safe expos.
I should mention though, that during playtesting we did see some great pressure plays from all the races (reapers / proxy pylons / zerglings). Some voiced concerns about the potency of reapers and colossi on the map, particularly due to the layout of the coastal access points.
Muta/zergling/baneling has also shown to be very potent during playtesting, although that may have just been a general trait of zerg, and not a direct effect of the layout.
There is one thing I don't fully understand though:
While Main2Main times are important to scouting and early pressure tactics, what is the significance of Nat2Nat times? Is that for mid-game mobilization?
|
Nat-nat is for mid game. It's important to have a reasonable rush distance so that 2 base all-ins do not dominate your map. If they're distances are too short, then there isn't any reason to macro. Short distances also hurt zerg quite a bit.
|
Have you considered replacing the two gold bases by a unique one in the middle of the bottom side?
So that if both players want a gold base, they'll have to fight for it, thus pushing the fights to the bottom?
|
On April 29 2013 16:38 HellNino wrote:
Have you considered replacing the two gold bases by a unique one in the middle of the bottom side?
So that if both players want a gold base, they'll have to fight for it, thus pushing the fights to the bottom?
I think this is what you mean right?
+ Show Spoiler +
|
I was expecting a ribcage shaped map upon reading the title.
I am slightly disappointed right now : (
|
150x150 is bigger than usual, but I don't think it's necessarily too big for a mirror map, or for this one in particular. You could definitely decrease the vertical dimension, especially if you adjust some bases. I think the horizontal is fine.
As said above, this is a really great first map. Main problem is the cluster of bases at the bottom as scorp pointed out. Try to avoid having bases that cover each other so easily in the lategame. I think removing the 4/8oclock outside bases would be best. Map would be better off with normal bases (no rocks) at the bottom. If you keep gold, put some rocks with less HP, like the unbuildable ramp blocker rocks.
Proportions... maybe a little too narrow in a few places, but it's fine. However, you definitely don't need those little highground pods in the middle. Remove those for sure, it's too chokey vs a colossus or mech army, and that spot is a crucial midmap engagement point.
Nice work.
|
Updated with version 0.2.
We've experimented with 2 alternate versions of the map and the layout seems to work pretty well in a number of setups. Will probably add those to the log in a later update.
|
On April 29 2013 17:55 ihasaKAROT wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 29 2013 16:38 HellNino wrote:
Have you considered replacing the two gold bases by a unique one in the middle of the bottom side?
So that if both players want a gold base, they'll have to fight for it, thus pushing the fights to the bottom?
I think this is what you mean right? + Show Spoiler +
Yeah something like that. The bases on the bottom seemed a little overconcentrated IMO, but the map is pretty big so i don't really know if this is a problem.
|
|
|
I agree that the bottom bases should be merged. A solid start to melee mapmaking for sure, though.
|
Why would we merge the bottom? It creates balance problems, which is why most competitive maps don't have an odd number of expos.
Controlling the odd expo would either be uncommon, or common enough such that it grants a hard advantage to specific style of play.
|
On May 01 2013 07:36 ekcolnovkol wrote:
Why would we merge the bottom? It creates balance problems, which is why most competitive maps don't have an odd number of expos.
Controlling the odd expo would either be uncommon, or common enough such that it grants a hard advantage to specific style of play.
Hmmm...
I don"t really see how merging the bottom gold would make the game imbalanced. By adding a big air space around air units can deny a turtling terran, letting a xelnaga nearby should help seeing if someone tries to steal it, etc...
I understand your point about giving advantage to some strategies, but is it bad, though?
All maps are like that: mutas map, mech favored map, do you go brood lords or ultras, etc...
The point was just to give players an easy reason to drive the fights to the bottom of the map, though i understand it may not be the best way to do so.
|
|
|
6oclock neutral base would be fine, there are enough other bases on the map that it's not a determining factor; either way is fine.
There's an old problem with gold bases towards the center of the map. The best example is Xel'Naga Caverns. It lets terran take a great position and gives them a base that is most productive for them (minerals) vs the other races, who want gas primarily from lategame expansions. On this map, it doesn't really help that much positionally, but it's still just really good for tvz especially to take it as your 4th base with a PF. I would think about changing these to normal bases.
It'd be nice if there was a path that dodged the tower vision. Like a very narrow path along the bottom edge.
|
On May 01 2013 19:15 Sated wrote:
I kinda feel like those gold bases are far too easy for Terrans to take if they plonk a Planetary Fortress there. They kind remind me of the gold bases on Xel'Naga Caverns...
But that's just theory-crafting...
WHOA^^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s64jJbf.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6uXMR7f.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dOR6kJf.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9KzJbl1.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MF0OsDx.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zErLo2G.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/InHWrEX.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SeYckNr.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8ZuW0QC.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Etl0pVe.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GjbZQhB.jpg)
