Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (91 users) | |
|
| Menderza United States. June 18 2012 09:31. Posts 1 | Profile # |
Kaerpasir
by Menderza
Published on [NA]
Overview
![[image loading]](https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2473110/Kaerpasirsmall.jpg)
Playable bounds 165 x 145
Cross Positions onlyLast edit: 2012-06-18 10:01:53 |
|
|
| moskonia Israel. June 18 2012 09:49. Posts 930 | Profile # |
| Cross only right? seems cool enough, I wonder how it will play out. |
| | "He who learns to walk, should never crawl again" | |
|
|
| DYEAlabaster Canada. June 18 2012 09:56. Posts 992 | Profile Blog # |
| Is this map cross-only with 2 different sets of spawns? |
| |
|
| The_Templar United States. June 18 2012 11:39. Posts 4027 | Profile Blog # |
Your mineral fields are too close to the edges, making air harassment harder to deal with.
The golds are too easy to control with terran , but should be ok because of several attack paths.
Main ramps are generally diagonal, not cardinal, as it has a better wall-off in the early game.
The top right and bottom left nat chokes look too small; 9 squares is the standard amount.
Fourth base might be a bit difficult to take.
Otherwise, looks good, and nice aesthetics :D |
| | I am the 4% http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17208214 ||| Improvement of posts underway. |
|
|
| NewSunshine United States. June 18 2012 11:43. Posts 1011 | Profile # |
The mains have cardinal ramps in this map, which is widely regarded as bad, since it makes normal walloffs difficult. Try fitting in diagonal ramps instead.
It seems cramped pretty much all over. Ignoring the balance side of it(which also takes a hit), it's just not fun playing in nothing but chokes. It tends to favor a protoss army in general the way it is now, which is bad, but you also want the map to just be fun.
The center gold bases are so close together, it might as well be 1 central expansion, with 8 normal minerals and 2 normal geysers.
I fear the 2 xel'naga towers are both too powerful, and too hard to access in the way 2 players would, if they were fighting for it.
Last, and most important, the mineral lines in the 4/10 o'clock starting positions are extremely easy to attack from the lowground. They should definitely be moved. |
| | [ESV mapmaking team member] [Former DF map team founder] [@ESVNewSunshine] |
|
|
| -NegativeZero- United States. June 18 2012 12:17. Posts 583 | Profile # |
On June 18 2012 11:39 TehTemplar wrote:
Your mineral fields are too close to the edges, making air harassment harder to deal with.
The golds are too easy to control with terran , but should be ok because of several attack paths.
Main ramps are generally diagonal, not cardinal, as it has a better wall-off in the early game.
The top right and bottom left nat chokes look too small; 9 squares is the standard amount.
Fourth base might be a bit difficult to take.
Otherwise, looks good, and nice aesthetics :D
I don't think the narrow natural choke would be a problem. Already maps like Ohana and Shakuras Plateau have ramps which are 6 squares wide, and those give an even larger defender's advantage due to the high ground. Only change would be less buildings needed to wall off, which really isn't a problem.
I think in general, narrower chokes at key points, such as the entrances to bases, would make maps more interesting, provided they are balanced out with more open areas of course. Right now pathways in SC2 maps tend to feel very uniform in size and very boring. Chokes should be terrain features that any race is afraid to engage into, not just narrow corridors that only T and P can abuse.
As for this map, though, it does need more open areas toward the center for large engagements.Last edit: 2012-06-18 12:18:08 |
| |
|
| Adonminus Israel. June 18 2012 21:01. Posts 484 | Profile # |
| The main/nat look similar to the one on cloud kingdom, though the main is safer against blink stalkers and other stuff that go up cliff. The 3rd is also harder to take, but still defendable. The center is too easy for terran to control, especially if they make a planetary fortress on the high yield. Nice Xel'Naga tower position, makes them safer to control and still covering very important areas, might be a nice place for a reaper tower control too. |
|
|
| shadogi United States. June 18 2012 22:41. Posts 194 | Profile # |
On June 18 2012 12:17 -NegativeZero- wrote:
I think in general, narrower chokes at key points, such as the entrances to bases, would make maps more interesting, provided they are balanced out with more open areas of course. Right now pathways in SC2 maps tend to feel very uniform in size and very boring. Chokes should be terrain features that any race is afraid to engage into, not just narrow corridors that only T and P can abuse.
As for this map, though, it does need more open areas toward the center for large engagements.
The issue with narrow chokes is in ZvT where the Terran bunker walls the Zerg into his natural. On Ohana, this isn't much of an issue because the hatchery is pretty far from the ramp, but is the bane of your existence on Shakuras Plateau (which is why a lot of Zerg have it vetoed, among other reasons.) |
|
|
| Quakecomm United States. June 21 2012 03:45. Posts 134 | Profile # |
| No wall off on main ramps? Hmm.... |
| | Don't you wish you weren't reading this? |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
