[M](2) ESV Equinox by Monitor

---

On January 14 2012 11:50 Nightmarjoo wrote:
Nightmarjoo seal of approval.

I really like the map. It strikes me as being an improvement upon daybreak's concept. Once players take either of the 3rd bases the map's harass potential increases greatly (in a good way), whereas I feel daybreak can feel a little stagnant. The 5th bases are very interesting, I like them a lot. They're a lot more interesting this way than if there was simply another ramp from the highground near the 3rd. My biggest worry is the backdoor in the nats, but that should be manageable since the nat choke itself isn't that big. I like the map's rock-use. I think this is the right way to use rocks: to make the map's middle more dynamic in a subtle manner.

---

---

On January 14 2012 13:16 RumbleBadger wrote:
Haha, this reminds me a lot of various stages of my last stand map... just better of course.

One question, though: The main (not the actual base but the area) is going to be partly siegable by ground once a player has vision. Is this a bad thing? I assume that you have at least somewhat tested it, and it's not a problem, but I just want to hear your opinions on it I guess. As a zerg player I would just be scared of a terran dropping marines in my main with a tank back on the other side of the chasm, but the medivac will be giving vision so it will make killing the marines exceedingly difficult. I may be exaggerating the tank's range in my head, but it seems like the range could go almost to the gas geysers. Losing gas geysers is a struggle for zerg, especially if the terran hits a neat little timing a attack, similar to the ones used on tal'darim except at the natural.

---

---

On January 14 2012 13:36 monitor wrote:


During the beta and first few months of SC2 release, sieging the main was a massive issue especially in TvT (unbreakable positions where you could "ferry" marines and tanks into the main). Luckily now though, it isn't really a big concern when balancing a map because TvT has evolved and TvP doesn't involve mech very often. TvZ doesn't matter because zerg buildings can all be out range- and the hatchery/gas/minerals aren't in range. Often a tank push in TvZ can be annoying to deal with, but considering the lowground is pretty open, Zerg can usually stop it when playing correctly.

---

---

On January 14 2012 13:41 RumbleBadger wrote:

Ok, that's kinda what I figured... other than that my only qualm (for zerg again) is that a late game zerg needs 6 gases, and after the main and natural mine out... only 5 gases (*gasp*). So it kinda puts zerg on a timer, in that they can't really win an overly long game, which is annoying as zergs tend to do best in longer games.

Overall, I do have to say the map looks great. Very little I have to complain about, and it's absolutely beautiful. Nice work.

---

---

On January 14 2012 13:45 SidianTheBard wrote:
Have yet to play on it but I fear the 3rd might be a little tough for protoss to grab in PvZ thus resulting in mainly 2 base all-ins. Protoss can't take the forward base with 1 gas & 6 minerals because they need gas badly and that base is super risky, it's much more of a terran with pfort or zerg base.

I think I'd also like the 5th to have another way to get to it. Currently collosus or tanks could siege on the highground where the ground decal is and easily take out a fifth while being in a fortified position to take the full base 3rd as well.

I do like how the first 4 bases are setup though, with the only problem being protoss grabbing that full 3rd base could be extremely difficult.

---

---

On January 14 2012 18:44 EatThePath wrote:
Depending on your taste for avant-garde, you could also do some very unconventional things to make the forward 3rd more friendly for protoss:

• 2g with one gas at half the normal amount (players won't like this)
  
• high yield 1g
  
• 2g with one blocked by rocks
  
• 2g arranged so that the player can distance mine and have normal mineral mining or vice versa
  

However, I don't think the current 2g 3rd is that hard for protoss. You can wall your front and move the "new front" to your 3rd, using forcefield to stay super safe. Mutas are the scariest thing, but that's a game of cannons anyway to take a 3rd on most maps, and the minerals lines main/nat/lower3rd are very defendable, especially with good obs usage.

The only thing I don't like about this map is the preponderance of hallways, but it's not a great dislike and I don't think it's a valid criticism either, just a gut reaction to homogeneity.

Really nice intentional design, monitor.

---

---

On January 15 2012 01:04 Ragoo wrote:
Really cool map, one of your most interesting ones so far!

All the features just work out cool and make for a nice layout together. The way movement and variety in chokes works is very nice and I like how that third and fifth are kinda out of position. This will probably promote a lot of interesting small army movement and harrass! Hope to see this map in Korean Weekly some day ; )

---

---

On January 15 2012 05:36 Barrin wrote:
wow lol im suddenly eager to play this map with you monitor :DD

I think I saw a very early version? It's come so far...

This is the map I will now think of when I think of a map without linear pathing; I know you really hate linear pathing lool gj!!!

Everything seems exceptionally well sized as usual.

---

Something to keep in mind for future maps (this map is fine dun worry): in terms of making the pathing interesting, I feel like you spent less time on the center of the map than you did manipulating base vulnerabilities. The simplest way I can put it is that it is nice to focus army positioning stuff in the center of the map (in an interesting way)... Map Control. It doesn't seem very easy at all to get map control on this map (a problem on many maps). Of course it shouldn't be too easy, but here it seems downright hard.

---

Have you considered repositioning the gas at the main to be less exposed from air coming from enemy's side of the map? I actually think it's fine the way it is but it seems like one of the few factors left to consider.

---

---

On January 15 2012 05:43 WniO wrote:
textures are too similar / not enough seperation to tell what level a player is on.

---

---

On January 15 2012 07:37 LunaSaint wrote:
I love this. I was sad about old Hysteria not getting involved in anything big, but this map takes aspects of both Hysteria and Daybreak - very tasty stuff.

---

---

On January 15 2012 07:37 LunaSaint wrote:
I love this. I was sad about old Hysteria not getting involved in anything big, but this map takes aspects of both Hysteria and Daybreak - very tasty stuff.

---

---

On January 15 2012 07:36 monitor wrote:
They are pretty similar at any point on the map, but I think in-game they look like I wanted them to and it isn't too confusing.

---

---

On January 16 2012 00:41 WniO wrote:

well, lets say a match is being streamed on this map... you want to make sure the audience knows where they are without glancing back and forth to the tiny mini map, so even if its nicely textured it looks to similar to the other areas. now maybe just adding terrain specific doodads or like things that when a person sees that area on stream, says "oh hey yeah thats the area outside the third main for the bottom player."

---