Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Web ChatTeamSpeak 3 (54 users)
Active: 7562 users | |
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 22 2012 14:11. Posts 191 | Profile # |
The Electric Version (Working Title) v0.2
by: Syphon
Published: N/A
Intro
+ Show Spoiler +Made to be a very dynamic, fairly standard macro map with a couple twists. Expansion path is vertical. Positioning is incredibly important. For the temp aesthetics, green lines are LOS blockers.
Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
Statistics
+ Show Spoiler +
Playable Bound: 136x142
Players: 2 @ 10 o'clock and 4 o'clock
Bases: 10 x full, 2 x 8m1g with 500 minerals and 5000 gas
XNTs: 2
Main2Main: ~164
Nat2Nat: ~128
Main Choke2Choke ~134
Natural Choke2Choke: ~88
Tileset: Not yet finalised
Older Versions / 0.1
+ Show Spoiler +Overview:+ Show Spoiler +Statistics+ Show Spoiler +
Playable Bound: 132x144
Players: 2 @ 10 o'clock and 4 o'clock
Bases: 8 x full, 2 x 5m1g
XNTs: 2
Main2Main: ~186
Nat2Nat: ~136
Choke2Choke: ~80
Tileset: Not yet finalised
Additional Comments:
Made in the 1.5 editor, so the Map Analyzer does not work. Many Overlord hiding spots out of XNT range. I want some layout feedback before I do texturing, though I have a pretty good idea of how I want it to look.
EDIT -- Version 0.2 updated. The entire map has been remade for the sake of better proportioning and distances. An additional full base has been added, and the half base has been moved and changed to a full low yield base. The corners have been reworked, and LOS blockers have been tweaked around a bit.Last edit: 2012-06-24 11:51:36 |
| |
|
| titanicnewbie June 22 2012 14:42. Posts 63 | Profile # |
I suppose my comments would start with the natural. I really don't like the idea of giving the attacker a highground pod to attack the natural from. And to try and wall off the area takes you practically into your third base. Additionally, walling off that ramp forces the defender to take a long walk back into the main, which makes this particularly vulnerable to multi-pronged drop pressure.
Additionally, I'd say you have too few bases for a map this size. I've done a quick draw of where you could fit in an additional full base and a half base. Take these in general terms.
+ Show Spoiler +
For this to work, I think you'd need to rotate your center expansions, which would make them vulnerable from the far side. Also I think that the corner bases could do with a wider ramp, as you can see in the image.
Between these suggestions, you could create an interesting choice between expanding one direction or another from the natural. |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 22 2012 14:55. Posts 191 | Profile # |
| Accidental double post--Deleted Last edit: 2012-06-22 14:59:50 |
| |
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 22 2012 14:59. Posts 191 | Profile # |
On June 22 2012 14:42 titanicnewbie wrote:
I suppose my comments would start with the natural. I really don't like the idea of giving the attacker a highground pod to attack the natural from. And to try and wall off the area takes you practically into your third base. Additionally, walling off that ramp forces the defender to take a long walk back into the main, which makes this particularly vulnerable to multi-pronged drop pressure.
It gives the defender a highground pod to defend from because there's no ramp -- Note the ramp size, attacker has to walk up a 2x wide choke and defender has a 5x wide ramp to move back and forth on if they're pushed through. I do think it's too far out though, and am looking for other ways to accomplish the same effect.
I don't know what you mean by walling off that ramp. How would you wall it off anymore than any natural ramp on any other map?
Additionally, I'd say you have too few bases for a map this size. I've done a quick draw of where you could fit in an additional full base and a half base. Take these in general terms. + Show Spoiler +For this to work, I think you'd need to rotate your center expansions, which would make them vulnerable from the far side. Also I think that the corner bases could do with a wider ramp, as you can see in the image. Between these suggestions, you could create an interesting choice between expanding one direction or another from the natural.
The way the bases are set now heavily favours expanding in one direction -- They're all very easy to take, which is why there isn't 14 of them. Rotating the thirds sounds like a very bad idea. It'd be too close to your opponents natural, especially vs. Terran. |
| |
|
| titanicnewbie June 22 2012 23:33. Posts 63 | Profile # |
On June 22 2012 14:59 Syphon8 wrote:
It gives the defender a highground pod to defend from because there's no ramp -- Note the ramp size, attacker has to walk up a 2x wide choke and defender has a 5x wide ramp to move back and forth on if they're pushed through. I do think it's too far out though, and am looking for other ways to accomplish the same effect.
I don't know what you mean by walling off that ramp. How would you wall it off anymore than any natural ramp on any other map?
Here's my concern. That highground pod is too far from the natural expansion to serve as an early defensible position. I get that in the early midgame when you're thinking about taking a third then it's a good place to defend. But imagine trying to do a forge fast expand on this map. The protoss walloff is closer to the third than it is to either the main or the natural!
Furthermore, the walk distance for the defender between that 2x ramp and the main is extremely long. Drop harass would be incredibly strong because the attacker doesn't have to move hardly at all to get into the main, while the defender has to walk all the way back through his natural.
On June 22 2012 14:59 Syphon8 wrote:
The way the bases are set now heavily favours expanding in one direction -- They're all very easy to take, which is why there isn't 14 of them. Rotating the thirds sounds like a very bad idea. It'd be too close to your opponents natural, especially vs. Terran.
I feel like the problem is that the bases are actually quite difficult to take. Once you're out of the early game, yes the natural is basically air-tight. But the third is extremely open to attack, which is going to hurt zerg players a lot when they try and take an early third.
Also that base I suggested rotating should really be your 4th. That half base ought to be a full base, and just consider it the real third. |
|
|
| Guardian85 June 22 2012 23:44. Posts 162 | Profile # |
| It looks interesting, but isnt the ramp next to XNT, a little to cramped? |
|
|
| FlaShFTW United States. June 23 2012 01:08. Posts 4999 | Profile Blog # |
| if you can make a reasonable third, I might be able to give you more feedback. I would say make one thats in between the natural and the corner bases, and make it a real third. That would give the map a really good feel. |
| | Never Surrender. Never GG. Always Fighting. BW4LYF. Woo Jung Ho Never Forget. |
|
|
| monitor United States. June 23 2012 01:24. Posts 2292 | Profile Blog # |
Wow this is super sick. I love how you've done the terrain and proportions. Definitely submit this to the ProAm tourney 
Imo the weakest part of the map is that there aren't many wide attack paths through the map. The middle is alright, but its blocked by rocks; the side paths have wide ramps one way, but the other, only have 1x ramps. I suggest making some changes to allow for a few more attack paths for large armies.
The nat is a cool design, but I'm not sure the 5x (or 4x?) ramp is necessary. I would shrink it to 2x or 3x to make it a bit more interesting. That way its even more unique- at the moment, it functions as a highground natural, like Shakuras. |
| | Starcraft 2 Mapmaker for TPW || Author of Korhal Compound |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 23 2012 01:48. Posts 191 | Profile # |
On June 23 2012 01:24 monitor wrote:Wow this is super sick. I love how you've done the terrain and proportions. Definitely submit this to the ProAm tourney Imo the weakest part of the map is that there aren't many wide attack paths through the map. The middle is alright, but its blocked by rocks; the side paths have wide ramps one way, but the other, only have 1x ramps. I suggest making some changes to allow for a few more attack paths for large armies. The nat is a cool design, but I'm not sure the 5x (or 4x?) ramp is necessary. I would shrink it to 2x or 3x to make it a bit more interesting. That way its even more unique- at the moment, it functions as a highground natural, like Shakuras.
Thanks for the pointers. I really struggled to find a good layout for the corner bases, and I'm certain I'm not done there. I might make it all mid-ground, or move where the low ground is relative to the base because I'm aware it needs a bigger lane.
As for the natural-pod; it is 5x, but I feel if I shrunk it to anything less than 4 it'd be atrociously hard to break up out of if your opponent ever set up a contain there. An alternative idea I'm thinking about is moving the pod slightly downwards, so the entrance ramp is further away and there's a wallable low-ground corridor between your nat and the rest of the map. It'd also allow me to get rid of the awkward LOS blockers in the main. Thoughts? |
| |
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 24 2012 11:57. Posts 191 | Profile # |
Update -- Version 0.2 designed with some of the feedback.
Specific things that are taken into account now;
* The main is rounder, so it's harder to camp Terran's production, there's also now air space behind the main.
* It's possible to make a funnel at the natural with 1 forge and 1 pylon between the ramp and the Nexus, so in PvZ you don't have to Forge FE on the highground pod. (Though you can).
* Better positioning on the Overlord bluffs.
* Main2Main distance decreased, it was too long before.
* Corners entirely reworked. There's now a much larger attack lane around the sides of the high-ground fourths.
* High ground pod at natural is significantly narrower, harder for attackers to establish a line on top of it.
* Rocks in the center ramps changed from huge diagonals to 6x6. They still block the area on the ramps that isn't overlooked by the XNT, but the open ramp width is now 3x, and the closed width 2x. (Changed from 2x / 4x respectively)
* An extra base -- The new bases at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock are 8m1g with the minerals having 500 resources each, and the gas having 5000. The old forward half-thirds are now full bases, and slightly closer to the natural.Last edit: 2012-06-24 12:00:34 |
| |
|
| FlaShFTW United States. June 24 2012 13:49. Posts 4999 | Profile Blog # |
| i still think that a third is ridiculously hard to take. my suggestion would be to have a 3rd where the current dip going to the respective corner bases would be. i think the extra base is unnecessary, as it's right next to a base already there. |
| | Never Surrender. Never GG. Always Fighting. BW4LYF. Woo Jung Ho Never Forget. |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 24 2012 14:30. Posts 191 | Profile # |
On June 24 2012 13:49 FlaShFTW wrote:
i still think that a third is ridiculously hard to take. my suggestion would be to have a 3rd where the current dip going to the respective corner bases would be. i think the extra base is unnecessary, as it's right next to a base already there.
Why do you think the third is hard to take? And in which matchups specifically? |
| |
|
| FlaShFTW United States. June 24 2012 14:39. Posts 4999 | Profile Blog # |
| take a look at the 3rd. it has 3 attacking paths to it. you have to defend 3 chokes in order to hold your nat+third. usually you only need to hold 2 chokes for nat+3rd. thats why i feel its harder to take. if zerg just masses units and just goes for a surround, you basically lose the game because ur not gonna be able to stop this. |
| | Never Surrender. Never GG. Always Fighting. BW4LYF. Woo Jung Ho Never Forget. |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 24 2012 15:09. Posts 191 | Profile # |
On June 24 2012 14:39 FlaShFTW wrote:
take a look at the 3rd. it has 3 attacking paths to it. you have to defend 3 chokes in order to hold your nat+third. usually you only need to hold 2 chokes for nat+3rd. thats why i feel its harder to take. if zerg just masses units and just goes for a surround, you basically lose the game because ur not gonna be able to stop this.
Realistically, you only need to hold 2 chokes (left and right). The middle can be walled off easily. There's also a Xel'Naga tower within the region you're defending which overlooks the 2 easier attack lanes. (Not to mention it's tucked against the main, and units in your main can defend runbys.)
If it proves to difficult to take, I already have 2 variations planned to make it easier -- The open center ramp can be decreased from 3x to 2x again, and the choke between the third and fourths can be shrunken by making the main larger.
This is the theory behind the layout, positioning wise.
Where your army is at 2 bases:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hDKjH.jpg)
Simple, straight forward. The 'valid' attack paths for pink are along the bottom and the middle. The only time the bottom would be used is if an attack is meant to be hidden.
Where your army is at at 3 bases:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Tp8jU.jpg)
The centre is walled to deter runbys. Blues army starts at A and spreads towards B. For your opponent to run either over the top or the bottom, they need to travel roughly 3 times the distance (dotted pink line)
For a Zerg player, doable, but certainly not unstoppable, or even very strong unless they manage to creep both sides of the map around. And really, if the attacker can micro both fronts that far apart, the defender can more easily with them closer together.
There is, of course, another case. You army is parked directly in front of the third. Here it can easily defend the bottom of the ramp into your natural, and the third from all sides.
A properly positioned army can technically be surrounded, but it still has a defenders advantage. |
| |
|
| Ragoo Germany. June 24 2012 20:24. Posts 2224 | Profile # |
I would open up the middle paths a bit (that 1x ramp), rotate the middle bases 180° and make the minerals really hug the edge.
Not a big fan of the dynamic of third to third distance. By far shortest distance between your base and opponents base and base right in the middle and open.
Towers might as well be removed.
Overall I like the map. |
| | Member of TPW mapmaking team/// twitter.com/Ragoo_ /// "goody represents border between explainable reason and supernatural" Cloud |
|
|
| FlaShFTW United States. June 25 2012 02:07. Posts 4999 | Profile Blog # |
Hm.... I mean I guess? But if Zerg comes at point A, lings can come through that small choke and just pin your entire army there. Insta-GG if you can't hold it off.
I guess it could work out... I'm always big on the standard 2 chokes/3 bases stuff. But if this works and is still viable, then go for it! |
| | Never Surrender. Never GG. Always Fighting. BW4LYF. Woo Jung Ho Never Forget. |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 25 2012 16:26. Posts 191 | Profile # |
Minor update--I played a couple games and the third didn't seem like a problem, and I worked out a few other things to do with it, if it is. I shrank the middle ramp again (before destruction) as it proved to be easier to run down the Xel'Naga ramps than I thought. Overall, I'm satisfied enough with the layout that I've started texturing/doodading. The theme is going to be 2 different installations towards the end of winter--One futuristic, and one more contemporary. Here's a spoiler of the 5 o'clock base:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qNSaM.jpg)
The texture set I've chosen, though subject to change, is incredibly unique. I do say so myself it looks pretty damn good together.
Niflheim Snow
Char Mud
Tarsonis Grass
Mar Sara Rocky
Braxis Alpha Wrecked Plates
Tyrador Cracked Concrete
Castanar Metal
Valhalla Panels
Braxis Alpha Manmade Cliffs
Port Zion Organic Cliffs
Korhal Skyscraper Cliffs
Last edit: 2012-06-25 16:27:04 |
| |
|
| titanicnewbie June 25 2012 23:29. Posts 63 | Profile # |
You should at least add a walking path between the highground outside the natural and the main.
This map is just begging for blink stalker harass and drops vs 2 bases. |
|
|
| FlaShFTW United States. June 26 2012 00:57. Posts 4999 | Profile Blog # |
On June 25 2012 23:29 titanicnewbie wrote:
You should at least add a walking path between the highground outside the natural and the main.
This map is just begging for blink stalker harass and drops vs 2 bases.
This would actually be an interesting idea. maybe stacked rocks on that one area, so that the opponent would have a harder time to break it open, thus allowing the defender to take them out at their own leisure? sounds interesting. |
| | Never Surrender. Never GG. Always Fighting. BW4LYF. Woo Jung Ho Never Forget. |
|
|
| Syphon8 Canada. June 26 2012 05:17. Posts 191 | Profile # |
On June 25 2012 23:29 titanicnewbie wrote:
You should at least add a walking path between the highground outside the natural and the main.
This map is just begging for blink stalker harass and drops vs 2 bases.
I don't know why you think it's harder to get to the main than it is on a map that just has a downwards ramp outside the natural. The distance from that choke to the main is less than on Antiga Shipyard.
At any rate, you aren't going to be able to blink into most of the base due to doodad placement. |
| |
|
| 1 2 Next All |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
WCS
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ryQR2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iOvWN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8JSo7.jpg?1)
