Players: 2 Map Size: 160 x 200 Playable Size: 140 x 172 Bases: 12 (0 Gold) Xel'Naga Towers: 2 (Inaccessible by ground) Map Options: Countdown Timer Enabled
Travel Times Main to Main: 77sec (72sec after 15 mins) Ramp to Ramp: 64sec (59 sec after 15 mins) Natural to Natural: 58sec (53 sec after 15 mins)
Special Feature: Two bridges at the center of the map start retracted, and after 15 minutes of game time, extend to open a new path across the center chasm. The Extending Bridge neutral structure is a little-known addition to the melee assets for Heart of the Swarm and is assumed to be an experimental new map mechanic.
Update: I've applied a number of fixes to the map, such as making the watch towers inaccessible by cliff-walkers. I also fixed a bug with the rock towers, where the debris from one would destroy the debris from the other. The lighting has been slightly adjusted to make it a little easier to see the cliff edges and ramps.
I'll look into making some aesthetic adjustments so that the map looks better on low settings (as many have complained that the lights don't work using them). As soon as I can spare the time I'll get back to improving the map, though for now I need to get ready to move in the next 3 weeks. Please post your feedback here! I'll be checking this thread often.
The texture set for this is sick - only thing a little bit off-putting is the water.
While the XNGs are cool I'm not really satisfied with them as in TvZ they give that reaper total map control for free, and in all other respects they are pretty much useless except for Terran players (who get dropships the quickest, have the earliest cliff-hopping unit).
I'd rather they just be removed. A strong map is a strong map regardless .
The image here is a little outdated, as I've made changes to the watchtowers earlier today so that they can't be accessed by cliffwalkers. As for the water, eh, with the lighting on the map it blends in much better than the overview image shows.
Yeah water always reflects like a mother on overviews.
I think this is pretty cool. I think 140x172 is pushing it as far as how big a 2p map should be, and there's a couple other things you could nitpick at, such as the fact that most of the lights won't show up on low settings. But really great overall effort. A lot of the aesthetics are badass, and the layout looks very playable.
The concept of rush distances that shorten later in the game to break stalemates is great. I hope the bridges are wide enough that going through there is viable, when 15 min rolls around. I would definitely think about adding a third bridge b/c they aren't that wide iirc.
Yea I had a hard time getting bridges to work simply for their awkward sizing. They're too long to have too fit in a good many places, and placing them side by side has it's own issues. You also have to use them in even numbers as they don't fit squarely in the center of the map. It would be nice if Blizzard included a few variations into the melee dependencies. I know there are other bridge sizes available in the campaign, but they neither function the same as this one nor can we use them in melee due to the dependency issues.
I'm hoping that this map will prove them to be a viable map mechanic.
The idea of an extending bridge is something people always talk about, but here it is, and it looks like a good way to use them too, clearly you know your way around a map. If you keep at this I can see some insane maps coming from you.
Also, those are some awesome aesthetics man, love the detail. As for the day/night comparison, I actually prefer day, it's clearer, easier to read, and more pleasant overall.
On May 14 2013 10:09 NewSunshine wrote: The idea of an extending bridge is something people always talk about, but here it is, and it looks like a good way to use them too, clearly you know your way around a map. If you keep at this I can see some insane maps coming from you.
Also, those are some awesome aesthetics man, love the detail. As for the day/night comparison, I actually prefer day, it's clearer, easier to read, and more pleasant overall.
Heh, thanks man! I'm glad you like my work. =]
I'll probably try and do some more melee maps here and there. Though I'm new to the TL forums, I've been doing this since the day the editor was released, so given that and the fact that I'll be starting a new job soon, I can't promise I'll be doing much more in future.
On May 14 2013 10:09 NewSunshine wrote: The idea of an extending bridge is something people always talk about, but here it is, and it looks like a good way to use them too, clearly you know your way around a map. If you keep at this I can see some insane maps coming from you.
Also, those are some awesome aesthetics man, love the detail. As for the day/night comparison, I actually prefer day, it's clearer, easier to read, and more pleasant overall.
Heh, thanks man! I'm glad you like my work. =]
I'll probably try and do some more melee maps here and there. Though I'm new to the TL forums, I've been doing this since the day the editor was released, so given that and the fact that I'll be starting a new job soon, I can't promise I'll be doing much more in future.
I was told that my other maps will be added in successive seasons. They didn't want to publish everything all at once. Guess we'll just have to wait and see if they ever make it to the ladder.
Vault of Secrets is mine too, though it was originally called Lockdown and used the Korhal Wastes tile set. Unfortunately the version you can see on my site was lost, thus why it had the art redone on it. Artesia Prospect's art was intended to be very similar to it, as to be a sort of spiritual successor.
On May 11 2013 11:34 Saeris wrote: Yea I had a hard time getting bridges to work simply for their awkward sizing. They're too long to have too fit in a good many places, and placing them side by side has it's own issues. You also have to use them in even numbers as they don't fit squarely in the center of the map. It would be nice if Blizzard included a few variations into the melee dependencies. I know there are other bridge sizes available in the campaign, but they neither function the same as this one nor can we use them in melee due to the dependency issues.
I'm hoping that this map will prove them to be a viable map mechanic.
But the thing is, we really need more functionality than what they provide. The way they are used here (the extent of their functionality constrained to melee dependency unless I'm mistaken) is equivalent to destructible rocks that you can't destroy -- they just disappear after a set time or by another trigger of your choosing. In other words, it's an unpathable route that becomes pathable.
What I'd really like to see is some kind of modal functionality that has built-in fixes for problems with bridge behavior, i.e. units on the bridge get pulled to the cliffs while it retracts.
It'd also be nice to have pathing "under" the bridge in the retracted position without modifying the unit data.
As a former intern, is it possible these things will ever happen? Mappers apparently have our hands tied with conforming to Blizzard standards which feels horribly limiting at times compared to everything you could do in the editor. Even implementing things like this yourself, all one has accomplished is making an arcade map whose only function is a melee map that will never see the light of day. Which is quite discouraging.
Anyway, obligatory compliment for boss aesthetics.
Not really a fan of the huge split path layout though. Maybe an extreme small route between the bridges at least for a scouting path?
On May 11 2013 11:34 Saeris wrote: Yea I had a hard time getting bridges to work simply for their awkward sizing. They're too long to have too fit in a good many places, and placing them side by side has it's own issues. You also have to use them in even numbers as they don't fit squarely in the center of the map. It would be nice if Blizzard included a few variations into the melee dependencies. I know there are other bridge sizes available in the campaign, but they neither function the same as this one nor can we use them in melee due to the dependency issues.
I'm hoping that this map will prove them to be a viable map mechanic.
But the thing is, we really need more functionality than what they provide. The way they are used here (the extent of their functionality constrained to melee dependency unless I'm mistaken) is equivalent to destructible rocks that you can't destroy -- they just disappear after a set time or by another trigger of your choosing. In other words, it's an unpathable route that becomes pathable.
What I'd really like to see is some kind of modal functionality that has built-in fixes for problems with bridge behavior, i.e. units on the bridge get pulled to the cliffs while it retracts.
It'd also be nice to have pathing "under" the bridge in the retracted position without modifying the unit data.
As a former intern, is it possible these things will ever happen? Mappers apparently have our hands tied with conforming to Blizzard standards which feels horribly limiting at times compared to everything you could do in the editor. Even implementing things like this yourself, all one has accomplished is making an arcade map whose only function is a melee map that will never see the light of day. Which is quite discouraging.
Anyway, obligatory compliment for boss aesthetics.
Not really a fan of the huge split path layout though. Maybe an extreme small route between the bridges at least for a scouting path?
Well I will tell you that I discussed this topic with them early on. Simple fact of the matter is, the pathing system in the game will not support layered pathing like the kind you want to see in bridges. Believe me, I've wanted to have it in the game for a long time myself, so that was one of the first things I brought up. It's a limitation I do not personally see them addressing, simply due to how much work it would require (keep in mind that every idea is weighed against a long list of ideas for what they should commit time to next).
As for more complex functionality... the topic initially came up as a result of a HotS trailer I saw where they had a collapsing ice bridge, and I asked whether that could be used in melee or not. After a long discussion of how that would work and why it should or shouldn't be done, what you see in this map is the resulting mechanic they opted to experiment with. The jury is still out on whether or not bridges are an interesting mechanic or not.
My recommendation is to experiment with the mechanic and get high level discussion and analysis going on it. Hopefully this map will help to kickstart that. If the reaction to it is very positive, I imagine that Blizzard would have to give it some additional consideration. There's absolutely no telling whether they will react on it though.
Blizzard does listen to feedback from the community, believe it or not. As I mentioned before, there's all sorts of "wish lists" for features they want to add to the game, but they're all given different priorities, so the things that absolutely have to be developed take precedence.
There's a bit of a misconception I've noticed amongst the community, in that they think Blizzard is just one big dev team with thousands of people and millions of dollars that they can throw at a project. The StarCraft team is one of a number of core dev teams, and as such they only have so much manpower they can put to use. Battle.net is another team, and they simultaneously work on many Blizzard projects, both live and in development. Given that, it's easy to see how development can get bottle-necked, as again, there's a number of things that take precedence (such as keeping the servers operating smoothly). It's easy to forget that they're a company, so there's a lot more going on than just how they make and spend money. There's a lot of the same issues you'd expect to encounter at any busy software development company as well. Good things take time, and they're trying their absolute best to do right by their fans.
Oh absolutely, it's entirely understandable that it is what it is for a reason. At the same time it always leaves me wondering where exactly to set my expectations, especially with regard to things that could be done, or even have been done, by the community but won't ever make it to the players under the paradigm we've had so far. (This is not directed at you, of course. Or anyone really.)
As for bridges, the new unit/model is a great template for doing neat functionality that you can basically use like a door, a route chooser (like an X splitter), or just a simple pathway toggle (which is different than the one-time rocks mechanic). And this can use any kind of triggering you want. But that stuff isn't technically melee even though it wouldn't alter any gameplay.
Like for example you can change the retracted footprint to be pathable, which re-stamps the pathing to overwrite the extended state after the morph ability and allow movement between the bridge ends. If you want you don't even need to have different cliff levels, and it just functions as a kind of door. It's nice to have a model with animations to make this behavior clear whereas before it'd be hard to make a convincing map feature with some footprint and custom unit voodoo.
And the cleanest way is with triggers but I guess you could build it as behaviors, like watch tower activation. Although again this was only ever done in a GSL map once or twice. But there's no good reason we couldn't have all kinds of cool stuff in melee maps, like this for example.
If this kind of customization was at least on the table amongst some of the SC2 developers, it's got to be worth pushing for it. Inc 1000 bridge maps.
Now as for the map. I think the bridges are neat but at the same time in this setup they are way too insignificant. 5 seconds is way too little time won. Still good for an early test through. I also don't like timed stuff in general. But i see potential in using them in future maps and hope other mappers do the same.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uHbnTSU.jpg)
.![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7YTUrZR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FXPMlh9.jpg)
