|
ESV Challenger
Map created by: IronManSC Version 0.2 all servers Published to: [NA] [EU] [KR] [SEA] Published as: ESV Challenger
Overview:
Introduction: I've been out for a while and I've been extremely busy with life. Planning for a wedding and working two jobs is pretty hectic. During all of this I decided to work on a map design that I had in mind for a while, so ESV Challenger is it. If you've followed my previous work you'll recognize that this map is definitely a different style for me, so I'm happy for the most part. I like sticking to my original flavors as far as tilesets go, so you'll find the look of the map to be quite familiar with previous work that I've done. I didn't put any work into the aesthetics due to time constraints and also to make it easier to fix if I need to adjust anything in the meantime.
Poll: What do you rate this map?1-3 (Bad) (17) 40% 7-9 (Good) (12) 29% 4-6 (Fair) (10) 24% 10 (Excellent) (3) 7% 42 total votes Your vote: What do you rate this map? (Vote): 1-3 (Bad) (Vote): 4-6 (Fair) (Vote): 7-9 (Good) (Vote): 10 (Excellent)
Map Info & Features: Size: 152x128 Rush Distances: Nat to Nat: 46 in-game seconds -No watchtowers, high ground is crucial for control -3rd bases are half bases to encourage more expanding
Pictures: + Show Spoiler +
Have any mapping questions or want to talk privately? E-mail me @ askironmansc@gmail.com
|
China6284 Posts
Is the main blink-able from the back?
|
On November 26 2013 03:12 digmouse wrote: Is the main blink-able from the back? Is this a serious question?! I think u can clearly answer it urself by looking at the map, don't u think?
|
The layout is pretty interesting, but the cliffs and textures are just straight up bad. Perfectly straight rock walls everywhere, too busy on the low ground, not enough contrast on the highground. It's quite hard to tell at a glance where's what level. Also lots and lots of airspace for a layout that already favors air units, what with the transverse cliffs. Not sure why the thirds are half bases, either.
|
China6284 Posts
On November 26 2013 03:39 Phaenoman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 03:12 digmouse wrote: Is the main blink-able from the back? Is this a serious question?! I think u can clearly answer it urself by looking at the map, don't u think? OK I should add a concern regarding that. Yes the back of the main looks like a pain in the ass to defend vs Blink, plus there is another area Blink can be exploited to the side.
|
On November 26 2013 05:11 digmouse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 03:39 Phaenoman wrote:On November 26 2013 03:12 digmouse wrote: Is the main blink-able from the back? Is this a serious question?! I think u can clearly answer it urself by looking at the map, don't u think? OK I should add a concern regarding that. Yes the back of the main looks like a pain in the ass to defend vs Blink, plus there is another area Blink can be exploited to the side.
its quite a route getting to that position to blink in. Id rather have that vulnerability on this map than not
|
Not bad at all ironman for being out of the swing of things. Cool concept with decent execution. You should feel good about this map. I hope real life is going well for you!
I like all the parts of this map except for the fact that all the expansions cover each other so well. I think this problem is not due to the layout so much as the proportions and spacing. If the map was a little bit bigger and there were some adjustments here and there it would alleviate the density/vulnerability problems almost completely. To give just one of many specific examples I could give, I would rather the center was a bit roomier to allow two armies in there at once, at least while they set up a fight/posture. Right now it's barely big enough for one army positioned correctly and only 5 forcefields across where you would meet in the middle having come from opposing highgrounds.
|
IronMan! Welcome back!
My only thoughts are that the water level (canyon or whatever/sub playable terrain) can be eliminated and it would tighten things up a bit, and that either the low ground or the high ground could be made larger or evened out a bit. Other than that just texturing but you already mentioned that.
I hope everything is going well with you! Best of luck and thanks for plopping down another map <3.
|
United States9662 Posts
difficult to defend backside with those blink stalkers, can use that small lower level trail to get out.
welcome back btw. maybe i should make my comeback too xD
|
:o what happened to ravage? Idk I dont like how the main jutts out so much.
|
Good job, as long as I wouldn't mind to play it on the ladder it's a good map for me
|
On November 26 2013 05:11 digmouse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 03:39 Phaenoman wrote:On November 26 2013 03:12 digmouse wrote: Is the main blink-able from the back? Is this a serious question?! I think u can clearly answer it urself by looking at the map, don't u think? OK I should add a concern regarding that. Yes the back of the main looks like a pain in the ass to defend vs Blink, plus there is another area Blink can be exploited to the side.
Agree on that. Also, should the main mineral line be siegeable? Cuz thats the case here. Or i don't see the thought behind it.
|
Question: are you sure that those low-ground outside paths at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock are actually going to get used? Seems like any ranged unit sitting up on the higher ground path next to it just shits all over any attempt to use them aggressively.
Caveat: haven't tested the map yet.
|
I like that you included a half-base as a third.
|
Map looks too splittable. I fear lotsa swarmhost play or whatever.
|
|
|
|