|
|
|
|
|
Black Engine 134x148, rdr 34, macro + Show Spoiler + Bifurcation 134x150, rdr 34, freestyle + Show Spoiler + Celeste 126x142, rdr 32, rush + Show Spoiler + Remains of Korhal 134x150, rdr 33, standarT + Show Spoiler + Expedition Vera 110x160, rdr 34, freestyle + Show Spoiler +
|
I want to give my opinion on the advice about positionning mines towards the interior of the map, i.e mines are open and oriented to allow an easier access. I was looking maps of depressed member and i m thinking "Expedition Vera" is a pretty good one until i see two gold mines. I really like the proximity of mines from center because players have to take risks for set up their bases. But as SC2 has been for a long time discussed about workers harassement, the orientation of mines is maybe the reason of professionnals players to discredit this map. I also think that this advice/rule of positionning mines "open" is really negative for diversity of maps (when i say "open", it s like "mines are always near the border")
Maybe some ot these last minerals mines which are easy to attack (near from the center) could be protected by a new building (set upon the field) which one allow workers to harvest minerals inside and without go to and return, protecting them a bit longer from an eventual harassement. Each buildings has 3 slots capacity. Players aren t forced to build them and fields belong to the base wich is built on the usual place
This could work also like a challenge (bet) to chose yes or not if you have to install these buildings. The building would only have some hit points, in order to not completely close a potential harassement.
These restrictions of orientation for mines should be explained in an article imo (and how resolve)
PS : I particulary like the splitted gold mine in Expedition Vera, i hope TL contest will select your map, depressed'
Also i would like to make a suggestion to Expedition Vera
|
On September 21 2022 17:04 Vision_ wrote:I want to give my opinion on the advice about positionning mines towards the interior of the map, i.e mines are open and oriented to allow an easier access. I was looking maps of depressed member and i m thinking "Expedition Vera" is a pretty good one until i see two gold mines. I really like the proximity of mines from center because players have to take risks for set up their bases. But as SC2 has been for a long time discussed about workers harassement, the orientation of mines is maybe the reason of professionnals players to discredit this map. I also think that this advice/rule of positionning mines "open" is really negative for diversity of maps (when i say "open", it s like "mines are always near the border") Maybe some ot these last minerals mines which are easy to attack (near from the center) could be protected by a new building (set upon the field) which one allow workers to harvest minerals inside and without go to and return, protecting them a bit longer from an eventual harassement. Each buildings has 3 slots capacity. Players aren t forced to build them and fields belong to the base wich is built on the usual place This could work also like a challenge (bet) to chose yes or not if you have to install these buildings. The building would only have some hit points, in order to not completely close a potential harassement. These restrictions of orientation for mines should be explained in an article imo (and how resolve) PS : I particulary like the splitted gold mine in Expedition Vera, i hope TL contest will select your map, depressed' Also i would like to make a suggestion to Expedition Vera Adding new buildings into the map is not allowed.
|
On September 21 2022 20:21 dbRic1203 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2022 17:04 Vision_ wrote:I want to give my opinion on the advice about positionning mines towards the interior of the map, i.e mines are open and oriented to allow an easier access. I was looking maps of depressed member and i m thinking "Expedition Vera" is a pretty good one until i see two gold mines. I really like the proximity of mines from center because players have to take risks for set up their bases. But as SC2 has been for a long time discussed about workers harassement, the orientation of mines is maybe the reason of professionnals players to discredit this map. I also think that this advice/rule of positionning mines "open" is really negative for diversity of maps (when i say "open", it s like "mines are always near the border") Maybe some ot these last minerals mines which are easy to attack (near from the center) could be protected by a new building (set upon the field) which one allow workers to harvest minerals inside and without go to and return, protecting them a bit longer from an eventual harassement. Each buildings has 3 slots capacity. Players aren t forced to build them and fields belong to the base wich is built on the usual place This could work also like a challenge (bet) to chose yes or not if you have to install these buildings. The building would only have some hit points, in order to not completely close a potential harassement. These restrictions of orientation for mines should be explained in an article imo (and how resolve) PS : I particulary like the splitted gold mine in Expedition Vera, i hope TL contest will select your map, depressed' Also i would like to make a suggestion to Expedition Vera Adding new buildings into the map is not allowed.
Yes i understand, i m also questionning if these restrictions are a big deal... For example, does it seem a good idea if the base harassement isn t possible by behind ? in order to close minerals fields line to air units with a wall, a cliff or something ?
|
On September 21 2022 17:04 Vision_ wrote:I want to give my opinion on the advice about positionning mines towards the interior of the map, i.e mines are open and oriented to allow an easier access. I was looking maps of depressed member and i m thinking "Expedition Vera" is a pretty good one until i see two gold mines. I really like the proximity of mines from center because players have to take risks for set up their bases. But as SC2 has been for a long time discussed about workers harassement, the orientation of mines is maybe the reason of professionnals players to discredit this map. I also think that this advice/rule of positionning mines "open" is really negative for diversity of maps (when i say "open", it s like "mines are always near the border") Maybe some ot these last minerals mines which are easy to attack (near from the center) could be protected by a new building (set upon the field) which one allow workers to harvest minerals inside and without go to and return, protecting them a bit longer from an eventual harassement. Each buildings has 3 slots capacity. Players aren t forced to build them and fields belong to the base wich is built on the usual place This could work also like a challenge (bet) to chose yes or not if you have to install these buildings. The building would only have some hit points, in order to not completely close a potential harassement. These restrictions of orientation for mines should be explained in an article imo (and how resolve) PS : I particulary like the splitted gold mine in Expedition Vera, i hope TL contest will select your map, depressed' Also i would like to make a suggestion to Expedition Vera Well, thank you kindly. We will see. If it will happen than we will make some adjustments. But for now this is how it is.
|
I just understand that even air units are unable to see when there s a dead vision zone (smog, bushes,...). So technically it s possible to protect fields mineral from a side, unauthorizing vision with also some elements to forbid movement (harassement from behind minerals fields)
I presume this dead vision zone (smog, bushes, etc...) is consuming a lot of gpu ? do you experiment it ? this kind of map could be created respecting rules isn t it ?
|
I won't say anything about the balance of the maps because I don't know anything about it but about the art of the maps I would like to express my opinion all maps on the Ladder in previous seasons 75% are poor or average. Please take a look at these maps on textures:
- Expedition Vera
- Remains of Korhal
- The Secret Garden
- Bridgehead LE
- Ruins of Endion
Or This textures:
They look beautiful and you want to look at them
And why any map with AGRIA textures dosen't appeared in 12 years on 1v1 Lader ?
|
I think that the maps get progressively better. You'll see many quality submission in this TLMC.
On September 22 2022 01:58 [SC]Django wrote:I won't say anything about the balance of the maps because I don't know anything about it but about the art of the maps I would like to express my opinion all maps on the Ladder in previous seasons 75% are poor or average. Please take a look at these maps on textures: - Expedition Vera - Remains of Korhal - The Secret Garden - Bridgehead LE - Ruins of Endion Or This textures: They look beautiful and you want to look at them And why any map with AGRIA textures dosen't appeared in 12 years on 1v1 Lader ?
|
And why any map with AGRIA textures dosen't appeared in 12 years on 1v1 Lader ?
Polar is this your alt account?
|
WoL does have a lot of underappreciated tilesets/themes though.
|
Other examples with Nice art design maps:
[M] (2) CruX Old Homeworld
Anaconda
Biogenesis
Tikal
Timeless Wild
Cold Hope
Atlantean Rift
Purple Mire
Frostknoll
A request from a map makers. Please create as great as the maps above Ladder need this. I love to play on nice maps
|
Some of these definitely look nice but I would prefer that map pools include themes other than grass and dirt
|
A sneak peek on decorations of my submissions. Some are re-worked version of previous submissions as I have quite limited time this time around. + Show Spoiler +
|
Second and Third arts looks amazing! Gj! The other arts of the map may look good too, but I can't see them completely
|
I'm gonna be that guy and point out that the Zerus 4v4 map is Writhing Morass, not Anaconda. Both are beautiful maps though.
|
|
|
|
|