| freshnw United States. August 13 2012 12:30. Posts 26 | Profile # |
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/On6oi.jpg)
Playable Bounds: 180x142
Published on: NA in the Arcade (Strategy)
Current Version: 1.5
Map Overview:
+ Show Spoiler +
Aesthetics (Version 1.5):
+ Show Spoiler +
Older Versions:
+ Show Spoiler +Version 1.3 ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4IThK.jpg) Version 1.2 ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2YfJr.jpg)
Changes:
+ Show Spoiler +1.5
-Added dependencies.
1.4
-Reworked corner expansions.
-Updated map size.
-Removed 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock lower expansions.
-Two Xel'Naga Watchtowers outside the player's natural have been changed to one in the center.
-Added LOS blockers around the Xel'Naga Watchtower and center.
-Added LOS blocker at third.
-Outside bounds of map around the main and corner have been made more aesthetically pleasing.
-Aesthetics have been implemented on the map.
-Reworked terrain around map.
-Created greater symmetry among doodads.
-Fixed most pathing issues.
-The map has been retextured.
1.3
-Removed rock pillar in center.
-Widened center pathways.
-Pushed back pathway from the natural to the third.
-Rearranged minerals and vespene geysers at third.
-Changed terrain and added doodads to create a nicer choke at the natural.
-Replaced double ramps at the corner expansions with a single ramp.
-Reworked main to prevent sieging from the lower expansion.
-Outside edges have been given a more natural look.
-Removed various doodads, mostly plant life, rocks, and geysers. Do not worry! They will return with greater numbers.
-Map bounds have been resized to be relative to playable bounds.
-Minor texture and doodad tweaks. Last edit: 2012-08-30 09:41:10 |
|
|
| Ruinsteel United States. August 14 2012 09:50. Posts 40 | Profile # |
Hey, I'm assuming this is your first map by the fact that you only have one post  . The third bases seem a bit too far from the natural expansions. Generally you want a third base that isn't too hard to take, and is relatively easy to defend. The center of the map also seems very choked, giving protoss and terran an advantage with forcefields / storms / colossus and siege tanks respectively. It also seems pretty hard to take bases due to their positioning.
And for a mostly natural looking map, try to makes the edges of it less square.
The map seems fairly unique in its layout though, and I hope I helped a little bit  . |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 14 2012 13:10. Posts 26 | Profile # |
Thanks for the advice. As a new map maker, any help is appreciated.
Yes, this is my first map (as far as SC2 goes). I have been an SC fan for ages but recently have gained interest in map making. I wanted to make a map that was somewhat fast-paced with several options for counter-attacking. I agree that the center is choked. I was thinking that the center paths would mainly be used for counter-pushes while turtling defenses would be posted near the hard to defend position of the thirds.
I will look into making the third more 'normal' to take along with a less chokey center. |
|
|
| EatThePath United States. August 14 2012 13:56. Posts 2453 | Profile Blog # |
The way the pathways are right now, I think that 3rd base is pretty fair actually. It's a different style than most maps nowadays but because of the choky paths it would be more or less okay. Definitely harder 3rd than "standard".
That said the map can't stay as choked as it is because of lategame imbalances. So in general you should open up some paths at key points. For example that doodad constricting the middle can go right away. It should probably be even more open than that.
The expansion pattern after the 3rd gets even more unstable, moving towards the opponent. I like the ingenuity but it will make it almost impossible for a real standard game. The corners could easily be reworked to provide the stable 4th base but keep the main idea of your alternate routes.
Also, make sure tanks can't hit the main minerals/geyser from the low ground.
Concentrate on improving the spacing in the center, the precise flow / chokepoints and distance to the 3rd, and provide a viable 4th base. This will take your map from "neat idea" to something approaching competition-suitable. (If that is your goal I mean.) ^^
edit: Oh and thanks for posting! Last edit: 2012-08-14 13:56:54 |
| | Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 17 2012 14:31. Posts 26 | Profile # |
Version 1.3 has been released. All changes can be found in the OP.
The corner expansions are still a work in progress but I feel the rest of the map is strong. There will be a future version that will include many aesthetic updates, including a texture remapping.
Enjoy! |
|
|
| OxyGenesis United Kingdom. August 17 2012 19:10. Posts 278 | Profile # |
| I think the middle could be more interesting, maybe add more high and low ground or LoS blockers. 3rd still feels difficult, I can see terran siegeing up at the XNT and isolating the 3rd against zerg. I also don't think the 12 and 6o'clock bases will ever be taken, they are just too close to the opponent's 3rd (or their main depending on who takes it. I think I would reorientate the nat and 3rd so they are pointing more towards the centre of the map, that will allow you to tweak the terrain and get the map to flow a bit better. Keep at it |
| | Maker of Maps inc. Vector, Uncanny Valley and Fissure | Co-Founder of SC2Melee.net |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 18 2012 07:22. Posts 26 | Profile # |
One thing I have been considering is that there are too many bases for a map of this size. The biggest problem I see from this are the bases on the lower ground. They are bases that will usually be taken mid-late game meaning that decent size armies will be stuck turtling at the choke. This seems to detract from the flow of the map.
I was thinking about moving the corner expansions closer to thier respective mains and removing the 3 and 9 o'clock lower expansions, while keeping the attack paths similar. This would make the corner expansion easier to defend and create a better splitting of sides.Last edit: 2012-08-18 07:39:21 |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 20 2012 09:20. Posts 26 | Profile # |
I have come up with two layouts for the corner expansions and the corner in general. As it is, the corner seems really lack luster. To make the corners more contestable, I removed the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock bases on the lower ground as they really did not feel quite right being there.
The main idea behind the designs are similar: to make the corner relatively easy to take and defend but to make defending both the corner expansion and 3rd very difficult. Please judge the concept only and not texturing. Doodads are fair game but are in a very rough layout right now.
Layout 1:
+ Show Spoiler +
Layout 2:
+ Show Spoiler +
edit: updated layout 2Last edit: 2012-08-20 09:31:00 |
|
|
| Ruinsteel United States. August 20 2012 10:01. Posts 40 | Profile # |
| Hey, I like the changes you made to the middle. I agree with OxyGenesis in terms of the middle. While it isn't the most interesting, it's definitely better in my opinion. for the layouts you provided, I personally like the first one better. i think it adds a little more dynamic to defending the base, and I think it looks better (Just not a huge fan of layout 2. Not sure why, just doesn't click with me). I also agree with OxyGenesis about the thirds, but, as EatThePath said, it does add for something a little more interesting than standard maps. Overall, good work and I'm looking forward to where you go with this map in the future! Last edit: 2012-08-20 10:03:14 |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 20 2012 11:29. Posts 26 | Profile # |
On August 17 2012 19:10 OxyGenesis wrote:3rd still feels difficult, I can see terran siegeing up at the XNT and isolating the 3rd against zerg.
I've actually changed to a single XNT in the center which should fix that problem.
On August 20 2012 10:01 Ruinsteel wrote: I also agree with OxyGenesis about the thirds, but, as EatThePath said, it does add for something a little more interesting than standard maps.
I also agree but I am reluctant to change the terrain because I like the layout of the area. I was thinking about placing LOS blockers to help protect against sieging.Last edit: 2012-08-20 13:52:05 |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 24 2012 09:08. Posts 26 | Profile # |
After a few long hours, version 1.4 is ready.
It is under the Strategy section in the Arcade. |
|
|
| D4V3Z02 Germany. August 24 2012 09:43. Posts 570 | Profile # |
| Looks like this map is made for forcefields. Too bad I cant test it o.o |
| | Reason your quotes please. |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 28 2012 13:18. Posts 26 | Profile # |
| Ya thats very possible. Feedback from people playing on this map would help a lot. |
|
|
| Ruinsteel United States. August 29 2012 07:20. Posts 40 | Profile # |
Hey, I played a few games on your map and it seems pretty good. My only complaint would be the short rush distance, but I'm not a map expert, and definitely not an expert on rush distances.
On another note, I've found what seems to be a bug, but I'm not sure. The map seems to be using upgrades and research times / costs from an earlier point in the game. For example, Flux Vanes and Khaydarin Amulet are able to be researched while the newer Phoenix upgrade doesn't even show up. My friend who tested the map with me also made note of how Terran upgrades were more expensive from the tech lab. Not sure how this would be fixed, but its definitely something worth looking into. |
|
|
| freshnw United States. August 30 2012 09:41. Posts 26 | Profile # |
It should be fixed now.
Thanks for testing it!Last edit: 2012-08-30 09:44:54 |
|
|
| |
|
Store
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MrvAk.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Yuq1x.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6i0jR.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vvfd3.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iocmx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DCzlV.jpg)
