[M] (2) Annihilation station RE

Meavis

Netherlands1298 Posts

January 24 2015 15:52 GMT

Annihilation station RE 2.1
uploaded to EU
size is 142x146
nat to nat of 45 seconds
main to main of 61 seconds
14bases total
2265objects
countless hours in the editor, 70+ at least

tileset is mostly braxis alpha, with skygeirr tiles on edges and korhal platform on 2nd elevation level

about the map: the design goal behind it was to make a squared 2p map, with heavy use of different zones and chokes to stretch players to the other corners which are not always as commonly used in 2p maps.

old version: in spoiler below

imgur album for easy viewing

Analyzer(slightly outdated)
[image loading]

Top overview
[image loading]

Angled overview
[image loading]

HD 4k x 4k image
+ Show Spoiler +

Top overview
[image loading]

Angled overview
[image loading]

images of bases below
+ Show Spoiler +

Main

Natural
[image loading]

Third

area in front of nat and third
[image loading]

forward base
[image loading]

fourth
[image loading]

forward ramp
[image loading]

middle
[image loading]

corner base
[image loading]

side base
[image loading]

artwork
+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler [old thread] +

Annihilation station RE
uploaded to NA&EU
size is 142x146
nat to nat of 45 seconds
main to main of 61 seconds
14bases total
2225objects
countless hours in the editor, 70+ at least

tileset is mostly braxis alpha, with skygeirr tiles on edges and korhal platform on 2nd elevation level

about the map: the design goal behind it was to make a squared 2p map, with heavy use of different zones and chokes to stretch players to the other corners which are not always as commonly used in 2p maps.

old version: http://imgur.com/a/yRYiN

will very likely enter this in TLMC5

imgur album for easy viewing

Analyzer
[image loading]

Top overview
[image loading]

Angled overview
[image loading]

images of bases below
+ Show Spoiler +

Main

Natural
[image loading]

Third

area in front of nat and third
[image loading]

fourth
[image loading]

forward ramp
[image loading]

forward base
[image loading]

side base
[image loading]

corner base
[image loading]

middle
[image loading]

artwork
+ Show Spoiler +

strategy images
+ Show Spoiler +

zones

common attack paths
[image loading]

drop/air paths
[image loading]

overlord spots
[image loading]

defending bases
[image loading]

LongShot27

United States2084 Posts

January 24 2015 17:48 GMT

its really tough to look at because it looks like the same area has just been printed over and over and over

SwedenTheKid

567 Posts

January 24 2015 19:35 GMT

Beautiful map, and I like the main/nat/3rd setup. 4th seems hard if you expand vertical but I think that's good. It makes expanding horizontal a nice choice as well. All in all a really nice map, can't find any flaws.

ScorpSCII

Denmark499 Posts

January 24 2015 22:44 GMT

Please put the images in a spoiler

I like the map layout; it's simple, yet everything flows well together.

FlaShFTW

United States9930 Posts

January 24 2015 23:14 GMT

map seems bland in terms of coloring, making it hard to see the difference between the different elevation tiers.

this map seems good though. maybe seems a tiny bit chokey.

Uvantak

Uruguay1381 Posts

January 25 2015 00:17 GMT

On January 25 2015 08:14 FlaShFTW wrote:
map seems bland in terms of coloring, making it hard to see the difference between the different elevation tiers.

↑ This, meav pls ;_;

You need a color wheel in your life m8, also this, some of the stuff is rubbish, but other points such as color weight and schemes is very very useful.

Regarding the map, the corner bases will not see much play, and they could be removed as Iezael wants, but fuck him, it's your map, and i'm fine with those bases there, 14 base map powah!

/edit commas!

NewSunshine

United States5938 Posts

January 25 2015 02:29 GMT

The color scheme is fine, the issue is just how the colors are used, it's a bit noisy and the height levels sorta blend together. I think the problem would be solved if you found a better way to distinguish the top height level, it's what looks most similar to the lowground and creates the visual confusion. I would probably try a composition of darker panel textures, like the dark panels from skygeirr or korhal platforms. Otherwise, it actually looks pretty good, pretty nicely polished.

Timetwister22

United States538 Posts

January 25 2015 03:05 GMT

Concerning aesthetics, I have to agree with Newsunshine. Concerning the map iteself, I find the layout fairly boring, with some wacky proportions where space was used inefficiently, and could have gone toward adding more interesting features that made the map overall more interesting. It's still a fine map, and should play well. However, with someone like yourself who has had several interesting ideas, I expect less boring stuff from you.

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

January 25 2015 03:45 GMT

General aesthetics seem fine with me. Not a huge fan of playing them because they turn out depressing in game, but I have no trouble at all with the overview.
I think the layout is nice, a little too many chokes and ramps for my liking. Always makes for pretty tough and shitty ZvP gameplay without the option to go ultras and forced into SHs. In other matchups, especially ZvZ and TvT this looks very nice.

Gwavajuice

France1810 Posts

January 27 2015 08:24 GMT

#10

Aside from aesthetics, this map has plenty of things that I would like to know more about :

- 14 bases : what lead you to choose to go for so many bases? what would happen if you had the 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock (4 o'clock and 5 respectively) become just one base? What do you want to happen in a 7base vs 7 bases split map scenario?

- center of the map in late game : 3rd seems easy to take and defend, as well as the 4th (at least on a reasonnable fashion) which prolly means you wanted your map to favor macro games. Well I can get behind this, but what I don't see yet is how things will go in a 5 base max supply max upgrade late game situation.... The center of the map seems a bit messy with not a lot of space to set up a good engament with concave and multipronged attack. How would one defend against a Protoss deathball here? or against a fully maxed mech army? Can one totally turtle up and make the game go for 2 hours? I m not saying these strat would be imba on the map, just that it may require some testing. The movement of armies in late game scenarios might be not as enjoyable as you whished.

- IMHO (but I m just a scrub and unable to make maps) you need to rethink the scenario of your stadanrd game happening on this map, like what happens when both players have their 4th, what postion they would want to take, where would they want to move their armies, where would they clash, what strategical points will they have to gain control on...

Hope my remarks made sense and were helpfull enough...

Meavis

Netherlands1298 Posts

January 27 2015 13:24 GMT

#11

Alright, finaly got around to putting in last bits of pics for the thread

On January 25 2015 11:29 NewSunshine wrote:
The color scheme is fine, the issue is just how the colors are used, it's a bit noisy and the height levels sorta blend together. I think the problem would be solved if you found a better way to distinguish the top height level, it's what looks most similar to the lowground and creates the visual confusion. I would probably try a composition of darker panel textures, like the dark panels from skygeirr or korhal platforms. Otherwise, it actually looks pretty good, pretty nicely polished.

I've tried this, but IMO it looks bad with the black borders all cliffs on the map have, I might just completely redo textures if I can think of a complete package to replace the current texturework.

On January 27 2015 17:24 Gwavajuice wrote:
Aside from aesthetics, this map has plenty of things that I would like to know more about :

- 14 bases : what lead you to choose to go for so many bases? what would happen if you had the 10 o'clock and 11 o'clock (4 o'clock and 5 respectively) become just one base? What do you want to happen in a 7base vs 7 bases split map scenario?

there's no real specific direct reason for so many bases, but variety.
I expect different bases to be taken in different games and don't really count on all of them being taken in most games.
next to that, it's part of the theme this map has, it has a size and base count fit for 4p, but is missing the other 2 spawns.

- center of the map in late game : 3rd seems easy to take and defend, as well as the 4th (at least on a reasonnable fashion) which prolly means you wanted your map to favor macro games. Well I can get behind this, but what I don't see yet is how things will go in a 5 base max supply max upgrade late game situation.... The center of the map seems a bit messy with not a lot of space to set up a good engament with concave and multipronged attack. How would one defend against a Protoss deathball here? or against a fully maxed mech army? Can one totally turtle up and make the game go for 2 hours? I m not saying these strat would be imba on the map, just that it may require some testing. The movement of armies in late game scenarios might be not as enjoyable as you whished.

This could be a problem, the WiP variant had a watchtower located in the exact centre, to make these situations rather one sided and avoid the more easily splitable center becoming a front line.
I'm considering re-adding that if further testing shows to many split map games, but until now most test games have rarely gone above 5 base.

- IMHO (but I m just a scrub and unable to make maps) you need to rethink the scenario of your standard game happening on this map, like what happens when both players have their 4th, what postion they would want to take, where would they want to move their armies, where would they clash, what strategical points will they have to gain control on...

Hope my remarks made sense and were helpfull enough...

I've put much thought and testing in this, and I hope my answers earlier fill any questions you have and understand the design process of this map.

Gwavajuice

France1810 Posts

January 27 2015 23:07 GMT

#12

On January 27 2015 22:24 Meavis wrote:

...

I've put much thought and testing in this, and I hope my answers earlier fill any questions you have and understand the design process of this map.

I'm not doubting that be reassured, it was more my own questions coming up when see your map, sorry if I sounded like I was lecturing you.

Now I I just have to play it against real people to have more relevant input

Meavis

Netherlands1298 Posts

April 17 2015 17:53 GMT

#13

updated.

changes include:
widened the path to the side base
reduced distance from nat to 3rd
fixed reaper paths
improved background
changed highground textures
removed a few horizontal and vertical lines and replaced them with diagonal ones
increased size of vehicles on the map for more realistic scaling

Meavis

Netherlands1298 Posts

November 09 2015 11:07 GMT

#14

Lotv prologue brought the neccesary textures to finish it up, will upload new vers bit later today

[image loading]

EatThePath

United States3943 Posts

November 09 2015 13:25 GMT

#15

No functional changes right? Still an excellent map, really want this to be on ladder.

I could quibble about some openness and choke sizes around different areas but it's real a style issue more than anything, map will play fine.

And looks quite pretty and very readable, ++.

Please or register to reply.

[M] (2) Annihilation station RE

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming