|
A S S A U L T
Title Artwork by: Daniel Dociu
Analyzer
Previous Version
| IMPULSE |
+ Show Spoiler +It all started when I saw eTcetRa's "weird" map in Map Art Thread. After looking at the artwork I began to have images in my head of a futuristic complex in a Caribbean setting. Using ideas and works from other great map makers, I gained my inspiration to make another cool map. I did not have HoTs, therefore I was limited to what I could use in the editor, however, I decided to purchase it just for this map because I knew I had to make it..
| Inspiration - Motivation |
| Detail Cogitation |
+ Show Spoiler +eTcetRa, IeZeaL, SidiantheBard, ATTx, Mereel, Uvantak, SeinGalton
| A N A T O M Y |
| P H Y S I O L O G Y |
|
MY EYES ! THEY ARE BLEEDING ! aaaargh the lighting
|
I like the theme/tileset, but it's too "shiny" for my taste.
Layout-wise I have some concerns: - The high ground at the natural. Imagine defending a wall-in against roach pushes, tanks or basically anything that has range. - There are a TON of ramps/choke points. I think Zergs would have a hard time on this map. Try making it more open. - Blinks into the main-base from the base right next to it. They might be really strong and you don't even need extra high ground vision. - As far as I can tell the main, natural and third bases seem really far apart from each other. Defending 3 bases against ground units looks really easy from a Protoss point of view, but against multi-pronged attacks at the main and third you'd have to spread your units out really far from each other.
Anyway, I like the middle part of the map with the rocks and stuff!
This map might show some interesting plays, but overall I think the lack of openness and especially the ridge thingy at the natural kills it, especially for Zerg.
|
@IeZael - changed lighting for all daytime shifts. what do you think ? better?
@Knatterking - i did some fixes, do you approve? If not, can you tell me what to fix in the editor precisely so I can make more improvements. thanks for feedback it really helps
|
I had a little time and i wanted to test some things, but i couldn't find the map in EU, is it uploaded there?
|
This is a great design but it needs some tuning. I need to think about it and then I'll comment more.
|
Much better lightning now. Good work, mate :D
|
Not bad, not bad at all I really like this
|
your Country52796 Posts
I really really like this map. Fourth base might be a little difficult but it's very interesting and the aesthetic ideas are refreshing.
|
Holy shit this map looks awesome! I hope it gets into ladder or something. First thing I thought of was Desert tileset from BW. :D #Nostalgia
|
Okay after some testing here are my overall thoughts and feedback on the map, to start i must say that it looks very very nice, and the force fields walls look excellent. If i could make maps only for their looks i would probably end up with some maps that would look similar to this one, nonetheless this is not the case and as i saw in my testing many things in this map where not well thought out from a gameplay perspective, no need to worry here tho, many of these things are not something that can be learned intuitively.
First as i told you in the PM one of the reasons why we tell mapmakers that are starting to try an make standard maps is because you can tell better how the map will play out and give feedback based on that, besides it will make you a more solid mapper since you will get used to the average distances between the bases allowing you in later maps be more flexible with the layouts since you know more or less what works and what doesn't, this is not really possible when making nonstandard maps because they have more variables in the layout than in "simpler maps".
Regarding the layout and more specifically the main base it shows that you put thought into it, nonetheless many of these little tricks (like the blockeable back entrance) do not work well in sc2, and they usually make for volatile maps, specially if not mixed well with the rest of the layout to compensate.
One important thing for any map is the flow of it, how one base flows naturally into another, how it makes sense to take your fourth once you have taken your third. A excellent showcase of this is the latest starbow daily day[9] did yesterday showing how layout, army positioning and relative base positioning correlates. Now look at your map and search for the positions where the armies would be when taking naturals/thirds/fourths up to the fifth bases and check the average distance between the armies and the distance between them to the main/nats/thirds/closer taken base/etc, depending on those distance you can judge how the map will behave. Sadly in sc2 armies can't really be splitted, you can only make smaller blobs out of bigger blobs so this means you can't really make players split third forces with a map in the ideal way we all dream off.
Following this, it is apparent that the amount of small pathways makes for strong counter attacking, and this is very good, only the mayor issue the map faces with these routes is that many of these are quite awkward to defend and to move into. This is caused because getting the relations and sizes in a map takes lots of experience, which i repeat is why it is usually told to beginner mapmakers to make standard maps instead and that way grab hold of these relations.
Now as far as the feedback of the map itself goes here are some screenshots, many of these correspond to pathing issues with the map, i must say first that the hardest par usually tends to be forgetting to add pathing paint in areas where there are many doodads such as the zerus plats+chiseled rocks, but you did not forget that, which is very nice.
Cannon Rushes: These are usually quite hard to spot, even to me and i have quite a bit of experience, many many times dealing with a natural set up can be harder than playing sudoku or some other hard logic game, now if you don't know that you must search actively for them they can be pretty catastrophic for a map.
It should be noted that leaving a couple of cannon rush spots in a map can actually be a good thing, since even when they are an annoying strategy they are a strategy nonetheless, and removing them completely from all the maps can be hurtful to Protoss players and BO variety in such a map. This does not mean that protoss players should be able to do 1pylon+block in a map, such a cannon rush spot will surely be abused, even when talking about 2pylons to fully wall a position can generate issues in the map, but in this case it is left to the way the mapmaker set up everything to decide if a 2pylon block can be an issue or not. In my case i prefer to only leave 3pylon blocks for my maps most of the time, less than that makes me uneasy, but i'm bias since i play Z the most.
+ Show Spoiler +yes that cannon can be placed there. A B C; Phton Cannon can be attacked by one worker. D
Pathing: This one is the hell of many mapmakers, experienced and inexperienced alike, one mapmaker of note that had some bad pathing in some of his maps was Superouman, ProdiG also used to struggle with pathing. My general advice in this case is to activate the pathing layer (not grid,this one) and hide the terrain, leaving only doodads+units+pathing layer visible and work there to make sure there are not holes in the pathing where units could be dropped on/blink on.
Following this it should noted that doodads are generally used to remark areas where units can't pass on, only in limited occasions you can use doodads and allow units to walk across them without confusing players, be careful when using them.
+ Show Spoiler +
Pathways and Details:
For this particular map is is clear that many of the pathways can be very narrow, this is not a very big issue if the pathways where thought correctly, but in this case the sheer amount of tight pathways and some of the awkward positions the players can be draw unto can make the map frustrating to play on.
+ Show Spoiler +Quick example of a early lategame protoss army in comparison to a path. It is always good to test the pathing of colossi and reapers around the map (also note texturing). The use of very high overlord pods in a place that's surrounded by terrain level 1 can generate "issues". This probe could have perfectly being a Baneling in a ZvZ. There is nothing inherently bad about having such highgrounds, but they must be done very very carefully, as i said previously, there is a very thin line between a map dependent micro trick and map abuse, this is aggravated because it involves the vision of the players, Starcraft is an isometric RTS, this means that there is a clear inherent "imbalance" in the game in such a basic thing as the vision of the battle field.
If anyone wants to discuss more or argue against or in favor about something i said is free to do so, i'm now leaving to rest for a while x.X
Ohhhh shietttt forgot to add say that you should try to use the standard mineral placement, it will take care of inefficient vespene geysers and other things.
Other thing that you may find useful is this, that sheet has a good amount of information regarding distances and relations in some now old WoL maps such as Cloud Kingdom or Daybreak, many of these distances and relations haven't changed much in HotS maps, so it is always to have a look at them, i should probably try to actualize the sheet with new maps, but taking the measurements takes so much freaking time that i haven't go to it. Here is another one showcasing some old starbow maps if you would like to check those out too, and here is how those measurements where taken.
Oh! and regarding feedback and why not many people take the time to write specific map feedback. It takes a shitload of time.
|
Uvantak you are my hero. Thank you for putting so much time and effort into the mapmaking community. It really needs it.
I learned more from reading that comment than from many guides... I will be making lots of changes to my maps in progress.
The map is gorgeous. I don't claim to know what should change, but if you listen to feedback it could definitely be an excellent excellent map.
|
Wow thanks Uvantak for investing your time to help me on the map.You said it all. I have done the pathing fixes so you can't build on the hoses and neither walk over them. I also fixed mineral placement so units can have access. For the cannon rush and overlord pod sight problem, i was not able to fix due to difficulty and for the overlord pod sight thing, i tried putting a probe behind the tower, and if you pan carefully you can at least barely get a glimpse of the units, so i thought i'd just leave it, but it can be changed of course, and a change would deem better. im just lazy i guess lol. but yeah, i truly am grateful for your time on testing and feedback, an honor.
also anyone know why in the overview pic, the texture on the urban compound (black) looks so off and yucky? because when you are in gameplay view, the actual texture is the texture itself and looks better. When zoomed out in an overview fashion its nothing like the original texture, if you get what im saying. Maybe because the umojan lab texture has many circle patterns in it that it gets squashed when zoomed out??
|
bump, redid map into a standard version, so no more backdoor and such. huge image click for details
Fixes:
-openness increased -Removed backdoor concept -Removed one rock tower -Doodad and geometry size change -replaced debri and rock towers -lighting changed to auir
Functions: -You can snipe rock tower behind enemy fourth to cut their mining line
*If you think third is too vulnerable, or other fixes should be made, let me know
|
|
Although I lament the loss of the aesthetically interesting "Crosshair" style mineral-gas setup, I understand that it's not good practice to include it in LE-style maps. The fresh beauty of the map still shines through, even though it's quite a standard map. I love the cheeky little "Whoops, rocks fell on your workers" design; it's an interesting alternative to standard Harassment pressure and makes selecting a fourth a fun choice, adding risk to what would otherwise be a relatively safe fourth.
|
|
|
|