EDT 13:59 CEST 19:59 KST 02:59

Streams: 133 live
80466 total viewers

Active: 10667
Pizza Meter
[WCS AM] Ro16 Group B Prev…
WCS AM - Ro16 Interviews a…
AMD Premier League S1 Gran…
[WCS KR] Semis: Soulkey vs…
[WCS AM] Premier League Ro…
LGD.cn and RaTtLeSnAkE Adv…
GomTV: about the gamespeed…
Papa John's explores EG, L…
TeamLiquid Map Contest Fin…
Liquid wins the Curse Invi…
mousesports defeats DD.Dot…
Dragon joins Clarity Gaming
New Get 50% off Papa Joh…
TL Advertising Features
New XBOX reveal May 21st
[TV] Star Trek: Deep Spa…
[TV] HBO Game of Thrones
Hip Hop / Rap Music Disc…
My Little Pony: Friendsh…
Ask TL Staff Anything
The Automated Ban List
2013 Philadelphia Starcraf…
Left Sidebar Customization
Houston Barcraft
The Liquid`TLO Fanclub
The IdrA Fanclub
[Stream] Techstarcraft2
[Stream] Terrorterran
Simple Questions Simple An…
Recent Twitch.TV iPhone Up…
Shift button buggy while s…
Computer Build Resource Th…
Any fix for Twitch tv lag?
GomTV: about the gamespe…
GM / Master map hacker a…
HotS race distribution o…
WCS AM - Ro16 Interviews…
TeamLiquid Map Contest F…
Incredible Miracle spons…
[WCS EU] Challenger League…
[CSL] Spring Playoffs Ro4 …
[SHOUTcraft AM] Ro4 - May …
[Code S] Placement Matches…
[Code S] RO4 Day 1 WCS Kor…
[G] NaNiwa's PvZ (vs HyuN)…
The HotS Terran Help Me Th…
The HotS Zerg Help Me Thread
[H] ZvP Need help
Simple Questions Simple An…
[TLMC] Originality Selecti…
[A] Starbow
[D] Favorite Maps that Did…
[M] (8) Crux Breeze
OneGoal: A better SC2 [Pro…
The Great Dota 2 Key Req…
LGD.cn and RaTtLeSnAkE A…
Inhouse Dota
General Discussion
Dota 2 QQ thread
AMD Premier League S1 Gr…
Perfect World's Dota 2 Su…
Starladder Season 6
[The International] Easter…
Liquid Pasture Community L…
Sticky Flames Weekly Dota …
Simple Questions, Simple A…
Drafting, my thoughts on it
Solo Mid - Who? What? How?
A guide to Krobelus, the D…
Newly ported Hero discussi…
Pucca Comeback?
SC2 Player looking to le…
DES Sonic Interview 5/18…
[TLS2] Qualifier #4 VODs
BW Liquibet Season 25
sAviOr vs NaDa
D Ranks Teamleague Season 4
[GC S3] Gambit's Cup Semif…
[TLS2] Qualifier #4
Gem League II
Torenhire Starleague II
Challenger map on Starcraf…
Simple Questions, Simple A…
Increasing APM/EAPM
Tips and tricks: Defilers …
EVE Corporation
D&D Group/Player Thread
FINALLY! - The 2013 NHL …
2012 - 2013 Football Thr…
FIFA Thread! (PC - Xbox …
[Patch 3.07: Nerf Everythi…
[LoL] [SFW] Random Pics & …
Anyone Diamond want to joi…
[OGN] Olympus The Champion…
[LoL] General Stream Thread
[D] Pro Scene Evolution
[Champion] Swain
[Guide] Montegomery's Supe…
[Champion] Ezreal
The: What is my item worth?
Selling Items Thread
Witch Doctor Discussion
Carnival Cruise Mafia
[M][N] Les Mafia
[T] Bastard "Mini" Mafia!
Questions & Answers
Running Thread
TL Health and Fitness Init…
Leta - Movie
Michael - skyline
Anytime - Beast
By.Hero - Shuttle
Anytime - Pusan

Website Feedback

Closed Threads

IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid

IRC Web Client

TeamSpeak 3 (91 users)

[M](2v2) Processing Plant

Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Maps & Custom Games
 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. June 30 2012 03:12. Posts 48
Profile # 
[image loading]

Old post:
+ Show Spoiler +

I finally found some time to test my map with a friend. And to be honest it turned out to be a horrible map. I took all the intel we could gather in about a dozen of games and of course those from the friendly folks on TL. Here's a quick summary of the changes I thought necessary while working over processing plant:


- It was intentional that the rush distance was long, but it turned out to be too long. So I've made the rush distance a bit shorter (very messy work to do btw).

- It had too many chokes so I tried to make some (actually most) areas wider.

- Even though it had many expansions, most of them were unattractive. I've changed that by making the single expansions into double ones and made them more defendable. You'll still be quite spread out trying to take your third (or sixth if that's the way you look at it) but it isn't as bad as scorched haven for example.

- The main bases were too tight, if you had a many production facilities it became hard not to make units get stuck, also certain doodads were in the way. Now it's much larger.

- It was ugly and some of my doodads and such were actually hindering at certain places. I tidied it up a little and tried to make it look nicer.

Here's some pics and further comments:

+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +

That's it! Thanks for reading and please give a lot of feedback!

*Edit: It is now an arcade map because of ScorpSCII's movement which I personally think it's a great idea
Last edit: 2012-08-06 21:28:43
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

  Aunvilgod   June 30 2012 19:24. Posts 2031Profile # 
Your mineral placements are suboptimal and not mirrored.

I like the rest of the map. I have no idea about 2v2 so I can´t judge that.
Incredible Miracle
Old Post

 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. June 30 2012 19:44. Posts 48
Profile # 

On June 30 2012 19:24 Aunvilgod wrote:
Your mineral placements are suboptimal and not mirrored.

I like the rest of the map. I have no idea about 2v2 so I can´t judge that.


Oops! The were before I started moving them around :O I'll fix that thanks!
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

 
 Guardian85   June 30 2012 23:09. Posts 155
Profile # 
For a first map it looks very solid, texturing isnt bad, details an aesthetics.

But if i were you i might consider reducing the airspace on the left and right side of the map a tad little.
When it comes to Natural cliff edges, i would perhaps smoothen the angles and straight walls a little.

For 2v2, i think having somewhat shared bases makes it feel more of a team play, instead of allies playing seperately, so to that im positive.

About the scale of the map and the distances, im not sure.. you'll have a lot of time to do some real "nesting" before your attacked on any significant scale, so im guessing there is more focus on the defensive part.

One bit unfortunate effect of the map layout, is that cliff walkers have small usage.
Again since the size seems to me like Ranked as Epic size, i would assume that the travel distance for melee might be so large, that by the time the force has reached the enemy base, if they have scouted it, they will have the time to produce and prepare.
So it would be hard to keep refreshing reinforcements, though im unsure if thats a good or bad thing, depending on what play style.. its definately not for rushing thats for sure.. but you already mentioned that.
Old Post

 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. July 01 2012 03:08. Posts 48
Profile # 

On June 30 2012 23:09 Guardian85 wrote:
For a first map it looks very solid, texturing isnt bad, details an aesthetics.

But if i were you i might consider reducing the airspace on the left and right side of the map a tad little.
When it comes to Natural cliff edges, i would perhaps smoothen the angles and straight walls a little.

For 2v2, i think having somewhat shared bases makes it feel more of a team play, instead of allies playing seperately, so to that im positive.

About the scale of the map and the distances, im not sure.. you'll have a lot of time to do some real "nesting" before your attacked on any significant scale, so im guessing there is more focus on the defensive part.

One bit unfortunate effect of the map layout, is that cliff walkers have small usage.
Again since the size seems to me like Ranked as Epic size, i would assume that the travel distance for melee might be so large, that by the time the force has reached the enemy base, if they have scouted it, they will have the time to produce and prepare.
So it would be hard to keep refreshing reinforcements, though im unsure if thats a good or bad thing, depending on what play style.. its definately not for rushing thats for sure.. but you already mentioned that.


Thanks for the analysis!
The matter of the airspace is actually not as bad as the overview suggests. Here's a pic with visible bonds so please tell me if it is too much still (besides, the map has undergone some minor changes):

+ Show Spoiler +

On the size argument, I suppose I can't really argue in precise manner on that, I will have to get some friends to play with me on it an see how it turns out but for the close future that's sadly not possible...

Also, maybe I can come up with something that makes the reenforcement paths shorter for mid/endgame scenarios, maybe by destrucitble rocks (like on daybreak), but it will require deffinetly some radical layout changes so I'm kind of hesitant of doing this right now.
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

 
 Guardian85   July 01 2012 05:46. Posts 155
Profile # 
Those playable bounds look promising
Old Post

 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. August 06 2012 09:37. Posts 48
Profile # 
bumbed because all new and shiny!
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

 
 MicroMonkey   August 10 2012 04:41. Posts 94
Profile # 
The ramp dont give defenders adv. but give the attackers adv. attackers go from ramp to ramp but defenders will run around the inbase and get out manovered.
Old Post

 
 TheFish7   United States. August 10 2012 06:00. Posts 1208
Profile # 
Have to agree with MicroMonkey's assessment of the main bases - although its not THAT bad, but a defender will have to walk down his ramp to assist in defending a teammate, which makes things a lot more complicated for the defenders. The layout of the main in general is awkward with that big open area in the back corners. However, I do like how you have done a sort of hybrid shared/separate base format, that is kind of cool and definately worth exploring.

You have a lot of straight lines on the cliffs, which is generally considered to be a bit boring. the open area around the gold bases is quite vast, and the watchtowers are on a very small bit of highground, which could be bad because siege tanks camped up there become very tough to take out. I would maybe make that high grounds with the towers much bigger and more accessible, like the one in the mid of antiga shipyard, this would make engagements in that area a bit more interesting. Also, you have a very nasty choke on the lowground of the 3 and 9 oclock positions. I don't see a reason for that except to make it impossible to attack into that double-base. If your going to have a double-base, imo it shouldn't be that hard to attack into it.

Nice layout in general, though, just needs some tweaking. And your aesthetics are very cool and different, I have been wanting to see natural stuff mixed in with the space platform stuff more.
Last edit: 2012-08-10 06:02:17
 
Old Post

 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. August 10 2012 07:48. Posts 48
Profile # 

The ramp dont give defenders adv. but give the attackers adv. attackers go from ramp to ramp but defenders will run around the inbase and get out manovered.



On August 10 2012 06:00 TheFish7 wrote:
Have to agree with MicroMonkey's assessment of the main bases - although its not THAT bad, but a defender will have to walk down his ramp to assist in defending a teammate, which makes things a lot more complicated for the defenders. The layout of the main in general is awkward with that big open area in the back corners. However, I do like how you have done a sort of hybrid shared/separate base format, that is kind of cool and definately worth exploring.

You have a lot of straight lines on the cliffs, which is generally considered to be a bit boring. the open area around the gold bases is quite vast, and the watchtowers are on a very small bit of highground, which could be bad because siege tanks camped up there become very tough to take out. I would maybe make that high grounds with the towers much bigger and more accessible, like the one in the mid of antiga shipyard, this would make engagements in that area a bit more interesting. Also, you have a very nasty choke on the lowground of the 3 and 9 oclock positions. I don't see a reason for that except to make it impossible to attack into that double-base. If your going to have a double-base, imo it shouldn't be that hard to attack into it.

Nice layout in general, though, just needs some tweaking. And your aesthetics are very cool and different, I have been wanting to see natural stuff mixed in with the space platform stuff more.


First things first: Thank you both for your analysis! I'm rather new to mapmaking as you might have noticed so this helps a lot!

To the attackers advantage: I guess I'll have to move the ramp backwards which will effectively make the ramp to ramp way for attackers longer while defenders will remain the same. Or shall I put an obstacle inbetween them?

+ Show Spoiler +

Of course I'm open to other solutions but those are the ones that came to mind! In any case I want to keep two bases down there and as far as I know this is the most compact way to do it (without having creep of a hatch blocking the other expo to non zergs).

You said something about the big space in the main bases, this has two reasons:
First there's pretty much no other safe space to put production buildings, and as it is a huge macro map there will potentially lots of them. On Lunar or Ruins of Tarsonis there's a lot of additional space in the natural area wich you will have to defend anyways at a certain point in the game. But to make things more interesting I'll give the back area more structure. Maybe a "V-cut" or some doodads hmm...
Second thing is as terran with many addons, units tend to get stuck if you don't carfully place your buildings as it is a diagonal plane (So you can't use it very efficiently). I've decided to just give some overkill space to avoid that. But I'll reconsider.
Solving these two problems will also reduce the amount of straight cliffs, so yes! Good advice.


To the XWT thing, I haven't had many occasions to engage at this place (AIs tend to attack straight -_____-) they were ment to give players the ability to watch both outter attack paths so I never payed much attention to them. I'm sure I'll be able to think of something interesting .


Last the "nasty choke": I'll open that up quite a simple fix thanks for pointing that out.

Guess I'll be back with an updated version in a few days :D

Thanks again <3
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

 
 DoubleReed   United States. August 10 2012 10:22. Posts 3133
Profile Blog # 
Moving the ramps farther away will actually make things worse. If I'm going to defend my ally, I'm just going to go down the ramp a la Scorched Haven. Going around the back wouldn't make any sense. The 'joined bases in the back' isn't really going to help defenders at all realistically (at least not with this set up). If anything it simply makes ling/hellion-runbys more deadly because a flaw on either side exposes both players.

I would suggest putting the ramps behind the naturals rather than in front of the naturals. More like Tempest and less like Scorched Haven. You may want to tuck the mains further back if you want to do this in order to give more room.

Those naturals look really close to each other by the way. Like really close. Like I'm-worried-about-my-creep-covering-my-ally's-base close.

Anyway, cool design!
Last edit: 2012-08-10 10:27:03
Baby, you want to make like Stravinsky and perform a Rite of Spring?
Old Post

 
 -NegativeZero-   United States. August 10 2012 14:38. Posts 584
Profile # 
The bottom edges of the cliffs look messed up, with random extra terrain at the bottom. You're probably using a cliff type which isn't designed to be used with space platform maps.
broodwarmaps.net
Old Post

 
 Bobnoble   Luxembourg. August 10 2012 18:39. Posts 48
Profile # 

On August 10 2012 14:38 -NegativeZero- wrote:
The bottom edges of the cliffs look messed up, with random extra terrain at the bottom. You're probably using a cliff type which isn't designed to be used with space platform maps.


Up to the point where I read your post I thaught that this random terrain was unavoidable :O.

I'll just add 2 more types of cliffs then for the edges :D


On August 10 2012 10:22 DoubleReed wrote:
Moving the ramps farther away will actually make things worse. If I'm going to defend my ally, I'm just going to go down the ramp a la Scorched Haven. Going around the back wouldn't make any sense. The 'joined bases in the back' isn't really going to help defenders at all realistically (at least not with this set up). If anything it simply makes ling/hellion-runbys more deadly because a flaw on either side exposes both players.

I would suggest putting the ramps behind the naturals rather than in front of the naturals. More like Tempest and less like Scorched Haven. You may want to tuck the mains further back if you want to do this in order to give more room.

Those naturals look really close to each other by the way. Like really close. Like I'm-worried-about-my-creep-covering-my-ally's-base close.

Anyway, cool design!


!!! Runbys !!!

Very true you just made my life a lot harder . I'll have to think about that a lot. My first impulse (if that's an english word) was tbh "NO!!! I'll not change my mains that drastically". But on the other hand it makes if it better, also when I move mains further back they will be effictivaly closer making those runbys a bit easier to defend... I'll try it out amongst other things thanks for pointing it out!

*edit: The thing with the naturals, it's been tested fully developped hatch creep doesn't block expands.
Last edit: 2012-08-10 18:51:29
Carriah has derived!
Old Post

Please log in or register to reply.
 
Refresh
StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2
Dota 2
League of Legends
[ Show 110 non-featured ]

» Recent SC2 Results
» Premier SC2 Tournaments
Sidebar Settings...

The Little App Factory



The opinions expressed by our users do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff.

Advertising | Jobs | Privacy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren. Ad tag: TF_US.
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2002-2013 Teamliquid.net. All Rights Reserved