|
Keep our forum clean! PLEASE post your WIP melee maps in this thread for initial feedback. -Barrin |
I think for a first map without any practice it's awesome. It still requires playtesting, but I'm happy with what it turned out to be. I think the original concept is still present in the map with two rather easy expansions and a short rush distance. I'd like to see, how different timings work on a short map like this. I however might not agree with the reaper-jump, since the base already has couple of spots for reapers to enter. It might give more mobility for reapers, but not much. I'll see if it is necessary.
I forced couple of my friends to playtest the map (not in this state, but in a previous one) and it was interesting to watch the game: ZvT, 3 base terran vs. 3-4 base zerg. The intensity of combat was mindblowing. Both players got large armies across the map in no time at all and the action was nonstop.
I'm talking about gold-league level of play.
As for the playtesting I mentioned earlier, I'd love if people sent me games from different skill groups. I'm interested in how the map works out
And @EatThePath, thank you for all your support and advices during the creation of this map. When I get another idea/map done, I'll post it here.
|
np, you're doing great so far ^^
|
I done did another one
I just wanted to create another map and asked for inspiration from my friend. As every time I asked, he said "Cloud Kingdom". So I tried creating a map inspired by Cloud Kingdom. The base layout for main is extremely vulnerable to Reaper, colossus and blink plays, mainly because of a wide cliff surrounding the bases. Since I didn't want to copy Cloud Kingdom, the map was designed as mirrored as opposed to rotationally symmetric. This evens out a small problem in ZvZ, where other player's larvae spawn on the wrong side of the hatchery.
Again, would love some feedback.
1v1 Name: Night Unit Published: EU, America Playable Area: 172x156 Images: + Show Spoiler +
EDIT: Fixed main base ramps. They were horrible :c
|
The concept is quite interesting, but the map is very chokey. Perhaps you could widen the paths around the map? Also, you should avoid using vertical or horizontal ramps for the main/natural or third because people do not know how to wall them off properly, and they are very hard to "read" from the overview.
"This evens out a small problem in ZvZ, where other player's larvae spawn on the wrong side of the hatchery." - That's very cool; I think it is a fairly annoying issue in ZvZ that is often overlooked.
|
@LComteVarauG, Thanks for feedback. Personally I really don't like the layout on top of the map, and will reiterate to make it more appealing to use. I already fixed the ramp and tested it, so currently published version does not feature a straight ramp, but a diagonal one.
If anyone decides to try my maps, I'd love to download and watch the replays. Feel free to send me yours
|
Features: - 136 by 152 - LOS covering Xelnagas. LOS to the third to stop some shenanigans with pylons depos etc. - 3rd is easy to take defend/ destructible rocks. Susceptible to FFs. - 4th and 5th are forward bases. Each with different entry points - 12 bases Slowly trying to make the middle work. I guess considering most games don't usually go past 3/4 bases I based the map on that and had it so an easy 3rd but harder 4/5'ths.
|
+ Show Spoiler +[M4] Evening Napalm II Hi, should I add 20 / 10 / 5 / no extra expos? Edit:+ Show Spoiler +On May 19 2015 21:17 JPR wrote: @ fluidrone
The readability of your overview is, quite frankly, horrible. You can't tell highground and lowground apart. It would be good if you could colourcode the different heightlevels so we can actually see what's going on. I can tell you one thing though. The map is way too chokey. Protoss may love that kind of stuff, but Terran and especially Zerg are gonna have a really though time on this map. So open it up a little.
|
@ fluidrone
The readability of your overview is, quite frankly, horrible. You can't tell highground and lowground apart. It would be good if you could colourcode the different heightlevels so we can actually see what's going on. I can tell you one thing though. The map is way too chokey. Protoss may love that kind of stuff, but Terran and especially Zerg are gonna have a really though time on this map. So open it up a little.
|
I'm working on my first snow/ice themed map. I've posted an older analyzer before, but I've made a few changes since then. I also want to gather as much feedback as I can.
Please let me know what you think!
EDIT: added pathing to the analyzer image
|
I had a dream of a main/nat layout and this is what it's ended up as so far. Never had such a vivid dream of a map before. I'm interested in feedback regarding that whole main/nat/third design, and the middle as well. I just threw together a middle that had a small choke on the shortest path. Not sure about it yet.
|
I don't think the main nat set up is viable or balanced. You have a backdoor to the main, and a backdoor to the natural. There are three entrances to your first two bases. This seems a little scary. What I would do is remove the rocks from the natural ramp and get rid of the small main ramp, so the two attack routes are the backdoor to the main and the natural ramp.
I also think that the high ground between the main and nat is not being used well here. It's sometimes used on maps where the main and nat share the same height so you can still pull off a defender's advantage on one base, but the natural is effectively an inbase expansion. I think it should be removed, or at least flipped to the other edge of the main so it can also overlook the low ground.
The choke between the main and nat is a little long imo.
EDIT: Here's a sketch of what I'm thinking for the main-nat set up. Also, first time using ms paint... + Show Spoiler +
|
Well that's actually what I had until this morning. I just added the small ramp and the rocks at the nat ramp. I was concerned about warping in from the natural into the back path so I changed it to an in-base.
|
On May 20 2015 05:00 Gfire wrote: Well that's actually what I had until this morning. I just added the small ramp and the rocks at the nat ramp. I was concerned about warping in from the natural into the back path so I changed it to an in-base.
Hmm I hadn't considered that. Maybe you could make the path high ground relative to the main and natural instead of low ground? But then the natural would be at a larger risk... I'm not really sure what to suggest. This kind of backdoor is tricky to implement.
EDIT: Monitor created a map with a similar backdoor, except it began in the natural instead of the main. August Flood thread link.
|
On May 20 2015 05:00 Gfire wrote: Well that's actually what I had until this morning. I just added the small ramp and the rocks at the nat ramp. I was concerned about warping in from the natural into the back path so I changed it to an in-base. You could use the original design (aka Antares lovely MS paint artwork) but add some collapsible rocks on the ramp down to the back path, so when defending a 4gate you could knock them down and just have your main choke.
|
On May 20 2015 09:29 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2015 05:00 Gfire wrote: Well that's actually what I had until this morning. I just added the small ramp and the rocks at the nat ramp. I was concerned about warping in from the natural into the back path so I changed it to an in-base. You could use the original design (aka Antares lovely MS paint artwork) but add some collapsible rocks on the ramp down to the back path, so when defending a 4gate you could knock them down and just have your main choke. Yeah if that's viable it's the solution I was favoring. That's sufficient defense?
|
I think the only race defending their main "ramp" against 4gate is Terran, who could shoot the rocks down from a bunker or behind a wall. Seems reasonable but I'm not sure. Z would be defending their nat and p defends with PO inside the main
|
Sketched a new layout today, and wanted to get some feedback. My concerns as of now are blink all-ins and Terran players abusing the forward 3rd/4th. Thoughts? Bounds are 135x144.
|
Some cool things on this map. I think you can just shift the main / nat a bit since that corner is unused in order to make the main not blinkable.
It might become a 2 base fest since the 3rds are a little on the hard side (definitely no easy 3rd for protoss) and the nat isn't too hard to hold.
Is the long snake thing connected to the main pathable? Wasn't sure about that.
I would also say the bases in the bottom left / top right are needlessly large, although I guess it doesn't matter much if you're not going to do anything else with that area.
Also I like the expansion ambiguity
edit: here is some rough ideas I had for the map. Maybe good maybe bad, and it doesn't really address the protoss taking a 3rd problem, but maybe you can get something from it.
|
Thanks Fatam, I definetly considered something to that degree. I also considered switching the positions of the main and nat (and altering the forward bases to make more sense of course). This would completely remove the blink problem but would lose some of the map's originality imo. As far as for the Protoss 3rd base issue, I could tighten some of the areas to make the 3rd safer to hold, but I personally would prefer the map to require more effort by a Protoss (and Terran) player in order to take that extra base. Just experimenting at this point though.
As for the snake like path above the natural, it will be unpathable. Always forget to mention that. The corner bases will probably be kept large, since as you pointed out I'm not going to use that space for anything else.
Thanks for feedback.
|
Update to WIP, not much is new. Trying to improve upon what I have without changing the layout to much yet. Pretty purifier world textures.
The second variant was my attempt to help with the 3rd base.
|
|
|
|