|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/P8VyM.jpg)
TPW Strangewood Mire v1.1
Map created by:Samro225am
Uploaded to: [NA] [EU] [KR] [SEA] - search for TLMC
TLMC #2 Finalist!
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rBzxWpQ.jpg)
+ Show Spoiler [v1.0] +
Features
- 160x148 (v1.0 156x144)
- all spawn enabled, 1, 5, 7, 11.
- spawn setups differ in rush distance and create differnet game experiences
- complex geometry mixing 180° (2spawn) and 90° (4spawn) rotational symmetry
- accessible thirds regardless of starting locations
- collapsible rocks at 3 and 9 can be used to slow down early-midgame attacks
- collapsible rocks at 6 and 12 can additionally be used to make drops and air harass against thirds more effective
- pathwork, chokes and highrounds motivate maneuvering and precise positioning
- main extends over natural choke (similar to Neo Planet S)
Additional Images
+ Show Spoiler +(Please note that these images are still showing version 1.0) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rocCtng.jpg) (11:00 main) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oMEPpfi.jpg) (10:30 nat) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3IrS86j.jpg) (chocke is small enough to wall-off with two 3x3 and pylon going flower to flower; here the 6:30 nat) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VtBx7Qf.jpg) (09:00 third) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wRh7ANP.jpg) (12:00 third left side) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ren8uX9.jpg) (12:00 third right side)
Change Log:
v1.1
+ Show Spoiler +- map size increased by 4 in height and width
- no more rocks beside the vertical rocks at 12 and 6 - where the LoSBs is now gone
- rock towers instead of wonky 12 and 6 rocks on ramps
- no more watchtower
- middle cleaner and a bit more open, added LoSBs
- adjusted size of "chokes" between low thirds and middle to fit (5 3x3) to have same size and bigger openings from all four sides to the middle
- natural choke is now longer and blockable with 3 3x3 completely or forge+pylon+gate with blocking unit
- all dodads repositioned to fit increase map size
- many dooadads scaled down to not block flying units
- adjusted texturing where needed
Known Issues:
none
Edit1(130522) - added two lines to 'known issues'
Edit2(130529) - Updated to 1.1. Please refer to the changelog. Overview of old version spoilered.
|
Grats on finalist, good map!
I actually feel like the XNT might be unnecessary given that the map is somewhat on the chokey side ("chokey" here not being a bad thing, just how the map is).
|
The symmetry is very cool, I like it.
|
I honestly dislike this map. I think that mapmakes should start going back to different styles and also start looking up some old bw maps. Im so tired of boring maps like this. How about you stop making maps where the third and fourth are basically identical and instead make a really easy third but a very difficult 4th. It would make the game so much better and wed stop seeing people actually win by being terrible and just doing some cheap backstab tactics that blossom on these kind of maps.
|
On May 21 2013 19:08 onewaystyx wrote:
I honestly dislike this map. I think that mapmakes should start going back to different styles and also start looking up some old bw maps. Im so tired of boring maps like this. How about you stop making maps where the third and fourth are basically identical and instead make a really easy third but a very difficult 4th. It would make the game so much better and wed stop seeing people actually win by being terrible and just doing some cheap backstab tactics that blossom on these kind of maps.
have you played the map yet?
one hint: while the design of thirds and fourth is same/similar to have rotational balance, they will play out very differently in relation to when you take them; e.g. the right 6:00 base taken as fourth will need a different way of defending than the left which you could be take as third. It is true that you need same thirds and fourths deisgn on 4p maps, yet this map provides much more diversity than whirlwind, because of all spawns enabled and also because of the 3:00 and 9:00 bases.
maybe your comment was not very well informed, but anyway, comments like yours help map makers very little. this map actually tackles some problems very well that we have with whirlwind (positional-uber-balance > boring).
|
On May 21 2013 19:08 onewaystyx wrote:
I honestly dislike this map. I think that mapmakes should start going back to different styles and also start looking up some old bw maps. Im so tired of boring maps like this. How about you stop making maps where the third and fourth are basically identical and instead make a really easy third but a very difficult 4th. It would make the game so much better and wed stop seeing people actually win by being terrible and just doing some cheap backstab tactics that blossom on these kind of maps. We do look at old BW maps, but a lot of their features can't be done because of forcefield, warp-in and the lack of a real high-ground advantage. Samro's map isn't a standard one, you'll have to work for your 3rd quite a bit more than on akilon wastes for example. I want to see how it plays out.
Vent your ladder frustration somewhere else please.
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
This is one of the only TLMC finalist maps I haven't had a chance to play yet so I'll add my meching terran opinion properly when I've gotten a chance to play it today, but from the overview I really like some of the ways you've used the rock towers and I especially like the way (much like in Planet S) how the main juts out over the natural choke. It's hard to really quantify into words just how much that helps mech openings against Toss, especially mine which is a siege expand. It's part of the reason Bel'shir vestige is really hard to mech vs toss on as there's not really any highground for you to shell them from.
Whether it works as well as it looks like it will I don't know, but I like the look of it from the overview. ^^
|
On May 21 2013 19:08 onewaystyx wrote:
I honestly dislike this map. I think that mapmakes should start going back to different styles and also start looking up some old bw maps. Im so tired of boring maps like this. How about you stop making maps where the third and fourth are basically identical and instead make a really easy third but a very difficult 4th. It would make the game so much better and wed stop seeing people actually win by being terrible and just doing some cheap backstab tactics that blossom on these kind of maps.
Easy third and impossible 4th= antiga. I'm pretty sure most people were happy to see that map go. Also those "cheap backstabs" are what made life so successful. Doing those backstab attacks well is actually very difficult
|
ESVision/Ironman just streamed a few games on the TLMC#2 maps and the single game on that map was quite entertaning. TvZ from vertical spawns and ling agression ended up in a complete mech game from both sides with all bases taken at some point. very strong positioning from both players expanding horizontally taking away rocks as they grabbed more space (well, at least after they got that part  ) and harass/snipes against the far away bases.
This is not what one can expect from the first publicly streamed game on a map and in general not from the vertical spawn setup, yet it showcased the possibilities and issues with the rock and ramp setups between vertical spawns.
I am looking forward to many more games and if you are up for a few games to join the TLMC channel on NA and play the new maps, they are all pretty interesting!
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
This is not what one can expect from the first publicly streamed game on a map and in general not from the vertical spawn setup, yet it showcased the possibilities and issues with the rock and ramp setups between vertical spawns.
Does this mean you hated the game or liked it? I can't figure it out :p
Playing this map I really enjoyed the positioning aspects on it and I think for a change it's a really, really nice map for mech. For me personally I can't think of much I'd like changed.
|
Looking at this map more and more I would love to see it win, alongside Frost.
|
On May 21 2013 14:47 Samro225am wrote:
Known Issues:
we are currently looking into the 'issue' of too many rocks. while they are integreal to the map's concept, we might be able to make the design work with less rocks.
so what are your experiences with rocks on this map?
|
While I haven't played the map yet, we talked about it a little while obsing the game earlier today (yesterday now?), the long TvZ. They didn't really come into play much during the game, other than the players were diligent in removing them when it was to their benefit. That's always cool, but I think this map just has too many rocks in general. Part of the reason I say that is because top level play is too tight to allow time for the destruction of so many rocks at crucial early timings, so balance shouldn't depend on it all across the map. This is most relevant probably in the middle where the long vertical rocks increase the openness.
Now, those long vertical rocks and the long horizontal rocks at the 6/12 highgrounds seem to be meant to increase the rush distance and impede pushes in horizontal spawns. A similar set of rocks is used for vertical spawns, the little 2x6 horizontal rocks on the inner highground at 3/9.
Those rocks all seem like they are fixes, not part of the map design itself. And in addition to the rock towers and the rocks on both ramps to the 3/9 bases, it's a bit overwhelming. Personally I think the 2x6 rocks at 3/9 are completely extraneous and could be removed. The others I can understand why you need them, but I still think it'd be better to use less rocks, although I don't have a really good reason. Except for the inner rocks at 6/12, which are a chore for zerg to destroy to make the middle more zerg friendly, and they won't have a good opportunity to do that in horizontal spawns.
My suggestion would be to have rock towers over the ramps at the 6/12 highgrounds, analogous to how they function for vertical spawns. The current long horizontal rock not only looks funny, but it doesn't buy you much increased rush distance. So in my eyes it really only serves to create a narrow ramp, but I can't really envision a scenario in the early game where you would defend at that chokepoint in horizontal spawns.
The long vertical rocks in the LosB seem like they might be better as a permanent barrier. I am wondering about: what if you remove the rocks, make the current LosB line unpathable, and replace the inner doodad clump with LosB. This makes the center more open, retains the LosB feature which will be very relevant in horizontal spawns and many other situations, and simplifies the rocks situation. It is also really not that different functionally than the current situation with rocks. It would also emphasize the 6/12 highground position because it permanently takes longer to go around to the ramp on the opposing side.
Here is a picture to illustrates some possible changes to think about:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i9hLvO2.jpg)
Of course these are just my thoughts from observing one game and giving the map some thought for the better part of an hour while looking at the in-game proportions and distances. And I may have missed some of the motivations behind the rock usage.
|
thanks for the input! With some observation you are right, other analysis are not completely correct, but I agree with what you think needs to be looked at.
- vertical rocks in losb are part of the design, like the rock towers between vertical spawns they are meant to slow down pushes and force players to take other routes. think of a 2p axial symmetry with the shortest path blocked.
- the long horizontal rocks (12 and 6) used to be rock towers during the design process before.
- the middle could use a bit more space, but i am not so sure about your suggestion with even more permanent obstructions. i rather have more permanent obstruction gone and leave the vertical rocks in an important position. with the idea of smaller hole/doodad cluster at its end you are correct though.
your in depth discussion is very much appreciated!
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
Playing it yesterday although I didn't notice some of the rocks (like the ones in the LoSB, thought that was just a wall I couldn't break) I didn't mind your rock placement. If anything it benefits my very slow, high tank count style due to the fact it chokes off quite a lot of areas which in my opinion is badly needed on atleast one map in the map pool to make mech a lot more viable on it. There's lots of flanking oppurtunities for the other player, but if you've got a mech player sieged up well, they'll still be able to cover those flanks and at least do some damage before the tanks died.
I'd love to play it in a couple of more games today and play some more agressive mech styles, but I shut down my own push yesterday when I trapped myself in the wrong place :p
|
Map is updated to v1.1
Changes
- map size increased by 4 in height and width
- no more rocks beside the vertical rocks at 12 and 6 - where the LoSBs is now gone
- rock towers instead of wonky 12 and 6 rocks on ramps
- no more watchtower
- middle cleaner and a bit more open, added LoSBs
- adjusted size of "chokes" between low thirds and middle to fit (5 3x3) to have same size and bigger openings from all four sides to the middle
- natural choke is now longer and blockable with 3 3x3 completely or forge+pylon+gate with blocking unit
- all dodads repositioned to fit increase map size
- many dooadads scaled down to not block flying units
- adjusted texturing where needed
|
I like the changes.
I didn't notice this before (not sure how), but I think the vertical spawn rush distances are pretty worrisome.
Ohana (a pretty short rush distance map) has a nat ramp to nat ramp of around 34 worker seconds.. the nat choke to nat choke for the vertical spawns here is only 26-28! (depending on where exactly you consider the choke to be). Horizontal is more reasonable at around 34-35.
|
On May 29 2013 06:09 Fatam wrote:
I like the changes.
I didn't notice this before (not sure how), but I think the vertical spawn rush distances are pretty worrisome.
Ohana (a pretty short rush distance map) has a nat ramp to nat ramp of around 34 worker seconds.. the nat choke to nat choke for the vertical spawns here is only 26-28! (depending on where exactly you consider the choke to be). Horizontal is more reasonable at around 34-35.
Please check the possible wall-ins before throwing around false numbers! No idea how you calculated it, if you used an analyzer or if you measured from some strange position.
The wall can be build from ramp/plant to flower or flower to flower. Measuring on the central point on that line I receice 33 and measuring CC to CC I get 40.
Sure, if you wall off at the outmost point of the choke you get other results. The outmost point of the nat choke indeed is the smallest being blockable by 3 forcefields.
Please note that the choke is designed to be quite narrow and longish and is overlooked by the main (tank vs roach push).
All rush distances were checked over and over again. The design was adjusted in many small steps constantly looking out to get the numbers reasonable but different enough from each other, while keeping a space efficent design with thirds in a good and manageable distance.
So far the design works with all spawns enabled.
edit: now that is set: glad you like the changes
edit2: the whole design revolves around getting the possibility of aggression and macro in one map. if players spawn vertically and bring the aggression early one games can be short,but it can totally go into a macro game even with the short rush distance - because of the way the terrain is made between these spawns although this comes into play after the very first aggression. The shortest distance is made to be played micro-intensive in order to make it slow. I am sure there will be pressure builds, agression early on and even cheese but by design the game might be slower on vertical spawns (later nat and third in most cases) and more aggressive than on horizontal. That is what many actually ask for: make a map that allows aggression and macro games from all spawns and plays out differently often enough.
|
I like the changes too. 
^vert nat2nat is it really that small? I think it's worth trying given the map as a whole, how the 3rds are in those positions, and that will only be 1/3 of the time. By eyeball it looks okay, but still cause for a little anxiety. We shall see! I would like to test.
Map is definitely better for the simplification and adjusted proportions and slightly bigger distances. Really good example of iterating on feedback. All the rock towers seem really important in the applicable spawns, which is very cool.
Now am I thinking about possible watchtower setups, haha. It's totally fine without any, though.
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
I think the bottom/top bits were better with the previous rocks as it still allowed small units entry, where as now even big units can take that path early.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mrjx5Ab.jpg)
