You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
|Ok.Firstly - It wasn't my intention to change the basic touch of the map,because this is her identity and changing this would mean it's not the same map.My motto was:preserve the good & fix the issues.|
What was wrong?
Well I think too much gas & hard defendable expos.A other issue was the startposition issue.The north Joe's are nearer tot the choke compared to the south dudes.This problem have the most of the older maps like Arena etc.
What I done:
a)change the terrain left/right;now the expos can be easily defended
b)I delete on top & bottom the 2 expos and place one in the middle
c)I fixed the start positins whitout changin' the mains itself(no fear,about tanks I test the distance)
d)add larger bridges in the middle area;for more tactical posibilities
e)delete & add some doodads
f)change terrain deco:in mains(complete),before the entrance to the main(complete),in the nat(complete),in the left/right expos(partial).After I saw this squares on top & botttom I decide to use this motiv.
g)I place near to the middle of the map 2 smaller expos whitout gas
h)change stile(mains & nat) and size(mains) of the min lines
I hope it wasn't a bad idea to create this version.
In the end I have to thank JK)Valkyrion for his great idea.
|the pathing from 11 to 1 & 7 to 5 would not be a very fun place to battle, super small bridges storm zerg & tanks would pwn goons trying to get through, plus with the expo in the way at 12 & 6 there just isn't much room|
|I forgive you 'cause you don't know what you talkin' about.|
Cannot place larger bridges in that place because:
a)who the heck are able to defent this expo;have you thought about?
b)this will give zerg to much advantage(a zerg highway to the nearest main)
c)these are not"super small bridges",these are standard bridges for these game.
Just a hint.If you wanna attack this expo you can surround your enemy from both sides(left/right).
Get me ?!?
|and the horizontal path goes through that small bridges? in that case, weell a little hard, because you have smaller room as the mineral formation of the expo takes too much space. also center would be a little useless in a horizontal fight. but thats the so untrustworthy theorycrafting again :)|
|Antares, I can believe what I'm readin' here,man.|
Ok for you I'm willing to go deeper.
If you want to ensure that the race balance is more then a chimera you must have tight and open places on a map.I think the shortest way between mains have to be the tightest and the long way the larger one.
Look to the nat.It's still pretty hard to defend.With a larger horizontal path would be a hell to hold her safe.Can't you see this?
Perhaps you are a zerg player and that's why you need larger pathes,but your demand to turn this map into a zerg paradise I must decline,by all estimation.
the geysers pos. in the left/right expos;'cause they are too vunerable vs attacks from the other side of the bridge(tanks).
modified by Fry
|as you wish, but it is my viewpoint, maybe wrong :D so i explain: |
thats just me, but a slowpush there seems to be really hard to break as you cant flank it. and then terran is very close to your expo.
which are hard to defend of course i see. but it is very well compensated by the right positioning of the defensive units. the horizontal way is too tight to be so useful, so an attack should come from the center - one could figure it out and build the defense to rule this situation or idk.
when you want to attack, you always have to go to the center before you can engage the opponent. the horizontal passage is no way imo. so it shorns the map of 'tactical tricking' in some ways...
dont think that i dislike your map, its better than valkyrion's version :P (sry valk)
|Persuasive...I will think about it.|
|take away the last strategical aspects of the map too, and it will almost look like arena! ... yay|
|Thanks for believin' in me Starparty.But even with a open horiz. path on top/bottom it would be a little extreme to compare this map with Arena,by all the tactical possibilities she offer.Don't you think?|
You can't be serious...
@Antares it is my will to make this map so good I can.This is the reason why I'm willin' to recheck thorougly every Argument that I think is worth.Well now:
Opening the horizontal path on top/bottom will have the following consequences(after testing):
a)the top/bottom expos are very hard to defend;delete them would mean:
*a highway to the parallel main;and because the path through is not so long it will encourage rushes.Think about the situation when both player will start from top(or both from bottom),a larger horiz. path would be according to this not a good idea for terrans
*to few ressouces for the map itself
b)the nat expo would become nearly impossible to defend.I see,with an additional large horiz. path,3 large routes ending in the nat arrea.And I ask myself;how many player are able to defend such a place.
You said an attack would comes always from the center.But if this is so I need a answers to this:
a)why should anyone use the long way to the center instead of a shorter large path(horiz.)?
Btw those standard bridges are not so small at all.They are double so wide compared to the choke.
My conclusion is that a large horiz. path will favourize pretty much Z and P because of their mobility.They finally will play cat & mouse with T.
|lol this was the first stage of omega|
|you mean the first version,perhaps... |
|y first version|
|That's right.Btw somebody seems to really dislike what I done.But don't care this doesn't bothers me too much.To rating negative a map whitout sayin' a word about what you disagree on her is one of the attributes of a pettifogging human character.|
But let us be honest for a minute;who wanna loss his good reputation by revealing his name...(so long you have a good one)
|yeah thats very weird, i dont understand it too why there are always so many negative votes :/|
edit: is it for guests possible to rate a map?
modified by LostTampon
|Yes, I think it is.|
|well rating shouldnt be overestimated.. most of the voters vote 0 or 10 so nothing is shown|
|add a obs version for those who need this.|
|this map is amazing. i remember when it was first posted as something else and was horrible. its good to see how much JK improved and that everyone helped him make it so much better. |
|..... this map is like a joke it's so simple. No, imo it is not a bad map at all, but it offers so little as for gameplay imo.|
idk looking at the map hard I can see a good balance between tight/open areas; it has nothing going for it decoration wise imo though, the people saying it has great decoration are such jpg lovers, Velocity's decoration is 6934809345 times better than this; it has in game appeal, this is just a symetrical mess =/
I'm no fan of the gigantic nat, nor do I like the main setup. The northern part of your base can only hold so much, unless you're zerg a need to use the southern part of the main will be an inevitable; I can see some issues occuring with units trying to leave gates or factories and going from the south having movement trouble because there is an inbase choke from the sl and the wall of the ramp; especially for terran with their comsat.
I can see some issues middle/later game with terran pushing in one of those central paths in the north and southmost parts; it is easy to defend against that bridge early game, but pvt when t is strong (assuming the game gets there) it is very hard to assault that place due to its nonspacial quality: Say you are SW and they are SE and come at you on the southern path, attacking them at that bridge is suicide, your best bet is trying to get half your army around to assault them via the bridge in the east, but this is made dificult by the fact that their supply lines would scout you coming and be able to attack your divided army or prepare their main force to guard both bridges; if you are able to get across the eastern bridge to attack there is no room to flank them because the expo is there, it is not much different than trying to attack them from the bridge, your forces will be annihilated if they are at all competent.
There is no reason for t to use the open middle, a 6 block mineral only is nothing to fight over, t will use the outside tighter paths which guard expos withGAS; the gas and the fact that it is harder to be flanked there makes it perfect to use those paths not the hugely open middle with a useless mineral only.
The east/west paths are fine because the expo is not in the way and there are three paths for troops to go from.
I believe that the northern expo should be moved farther north and the southern one farther south, and that at the north of the southern expo and south of the northern expo a 3rd path should be added to make tvp fair. I also think that the gas at N and S should be in addition removed and added to the expos in the very center so it is economically beneficial for t to use the open wasteland of a middle.
Also I think the gas of the nats is more vulnerable in this map than in rushhour, it is harder to defend them (particularly with z against t). zvt in rushhour it is much easier to defend it with a sunk, it is harder in this map; if t goes FE and z can't beat t with good early attacks t will be able to have 2 gas fighting 1 gas (it will be easy to destroy zerg's gas at the nat).
|eh I guess after thinking about the map much more I have contradicted my original statement that the map was fine, imo it has racial imbalance; read above to learn what I think is wrong.|
|Give up your sensless cutup,and don't try any longer to misadvise the other.Your evaluation is tendentious and spares any background.You claim several times that this map is some kind of RushHour for 4.Perhaps u have a secret version of RH cause I can see any expo on high ground here.Not to mention that the playstyle is completely diferent.Aside from the position of the natural you are total on the woodway.|
My opinion is that this map is great maded,and offers a platform for any known or imaginable tactic.I have already play the map,everything works flawless,can't find any weakness.
|You just said I was wrong without trying to explain why or proving your side at all, good job, you sound like kingof8player maps with that brilliant logic dumbass.|
Give up your "sensless cutup", I think you're the one 'misadvising the other'. Your evalutation completely lacks any support whatsoever so fuck off.
The map is similar to Rush Hour III in its main and nat layout, as well as the large nat with 2 bridge exits, although it also includes that nice 3rd entry.
The map, since it lacks inverted ramps, has positional imbalance with the position of the nat in relation to that of the ramp.
You say you can't find any weakness, how about all that shit I posted above?
|he cant find any weaknesses, nor any strong points lol -_-|
|ciclops have spoken.you will need hours if at all you can find a better map.a real eye candy,and it plays great |
modified by Grief_Stricken
|I could find a better map in seconds. It's not eye candy, it's ugly as fuck, it plays great sure, because it's as standard as possible; combined with positional and racial imbalance.|
i read your statements so it's not necesary to repeat yourself again & again.look arround.hope you realize with you opinion you are pretty alone,exept.Inept
|no you look around, I have lnept atleast, who supports you?|
|beside your overstatements can't find any critic on this piece.and you?btw is this a critic from Inept?|
|I have explained why I don't like it, no one has explained why I am wrong, which I may very well be. No one has backed the map at all. You just repeat that it's perfect.|
|because this map no need to be defended.your so called issues are for every pro laughable,and for evry one else,also.|
mark my words next time when your alone with your opinion,you will be wrong again
|if you can't back your position shut the fuck up|
|are you angry? |
and about"I can find a better map in seconds".maybe one crafted by you?or maybe by Inept.
i searching for some good maps
modified by Grief_Stricken
|well angry at having to repeat myself, and LGI had pissed me off earlier and disrupted my normal calm.|
|have anyone other maps maded by Fry?|
|No, he hasn't uploaded any atleast. I've been waiting for some of his maps because he comments so much; he's one of the few people active in commenting who is not active in posting maps =/|
|oh and imo Velocity BA is much better than this map. Oh and I like my Argonne more than this map, it is atleast unique; in general I'm not proud of my maps and don't ever push them, I'm not conceited =/ And I'm not a fan of most of lnept's maps, but he has some I consider better than this.|
modified by Nightmarjoo
|i think if someone make such kind of maps,it is not necesary to make more than 3 or 4 in one year.and they will be the masterpieces of the site.|
velocity is not bad but very very simple some holes in the ground,i'm not sure he use any custom stuf(beside the large bridges),but the proportions are ok.on the other hand Fry use alot of custom stuf on galaxy.
and Velocity is not maded by you.also the map is no match for Galaxy
modified by Grief_Stricken
|no Velocity is not made by me, I never said that. Also, galaxy prime is more simple than Velocity. So what if he used custom stuff in galaxy, custom stuff both doesn't make a map interesting nor does it make it good. Look at grigs first maps here, they were all unplayable super customly made pieces of crap.|
Velocity's decoration is far superior to that of Galaxy's, it lacks positional imbalance, it doesn't resemble a single other map. Unless I have overlooked something is also has no racial imbalances.
|poor blind man.|
oh,i find grigs feces.you must be out of your mind to compare such crap with this masterpiece.
|Not comparing, trust me I know there's no comparison. I'm saying custom stuff doesn't make a map better.|
You seem to suggest that galaxy > velocity because it has custom stuff -_-
|the deco on galaxy is better because you can reach|
such results easily.you need to go the long way thru custom.not inciddentally became this map 5 votes.think about!
i begin to believe that you have some,for me unknown,personal reasons against the maker(s)of this map.it's the only explanation that make sense
velocity was easier to creat 1 level map,if you oversee the 2 corners.but they are still not vital for the gameplay.
modified by Grief_Stricken
|and wow we know how much "level 2" this map has. the mainbases are all level 2 OH WOW NEW CONCEPT|
|not new is important.good is important.btw i wish i can find more good and less new maps.|
|But that's BORING. The concept of bwm is not to remake the same boring map over and over, it's to make new maps with new playable concepts.|
The decoration in this map is a symetrical mess made to appeal to those looking at the picture. I don't care what the picture looks like, look at it in game, it's ugly. Velocity looks good in game...
The mains are not new at all, they are not special at all, there is nothing special or unique about Galaxy Prime, that is what I have against it.
Also, I may not be a fan of Valkyrion's maps, but I have nothing against him. And I don't have anything against fry, apart from his hard to understand odd comments about what people say his comments on maps are usually valid.
|the concept of the site is one thing and a contest a different thing.|
it is a matter of course that the site wanna try new ideas.who can have something against this.but in a competition crucial is quality.
you are wrong when you think galaxy is not original.the terrain decor.makes her original.you can find a other map that have a similar look,forget it!
you maintain you are here for a long time.fine,good to know.that's why you should better know that a asymmetrical 4 player map on space is a crap-work.to reach symmetry on this tileset is a premise,a must for a good map
|all those decorations are very subjective. i also dont like straight lines even in space tileset. and prefer the central symmetry (like velocity) rather than mirroring (like galaxy prime), though i also use it. and i dont know why i dislike, but it doesnt matter so much. we are all humans with different taste even for maps and mapstructure :P|
besides when we discuss about quality as you said, perhaps we should leave to discuss decoration elsewhere. imo a map should be original without inccluding a decoration.
modified by Antares
|If Starparty wants to, he can make any map look like a jewel, don't forget that. Decoration does not make a map good or special.|
Imo even though Space is probably the best tileset to use symmetry on, I say that symmetry (no matter what kind of symmetry) is not a must even on space.
|terrain decor.is clearly not everything but can enhanced a map significantly.if you don't believe me compare this map with the previous version.forget the other significant changes.|
btw after a longer contemplation i discover something really unique.you will need hours to find a second map with that attribute.i would call it - balanced resource placement-.
from the natural you have the same distance to the other expos.middle,lateral and top/bottom.this allows you in the game to expand wherever you want,with the same pace.and the distance to send units from the main in evry direction,workers or combats would be accordingly the same.this fact gives the map a additional balance.
modified by Grief_Stricken
|Decoration doesn't make a map good, insisting that is the dumbest thing I've heard since the last person said the Soviet Union was comunist.|
You seem to misunderstand what I say. Good maps have both good execution and originality. A good map has balance, both positional and racial; a better map has that same balance and maintains it in a new shell, one that is new and unique.
From my playing experience I can tell you that standard basic super symetrical maps are boring as hell. Basic symetry is always good in maps, having sizes the same and distances the same is part of positional balance.
Try a map, (4)Fortitude. It is a good map, it has positional and racial balance. It has however nothing special or new about it; I found it to be very boring when it was used in one of our weekly tournies. A good map, but not one that was really that fun to play =/
Don't be such a jpg lover; the picture only shows so much. I really don't care how 'great' you say the decoration is, the map itself is not original or special; it's boring, and imo has racial imbalance, and clearly has a small amount of positional imbalance, however I regard the positional imbalance in this map largely ignorable.
|"fun to play"is something subjectiv.i have fun on this map or whatever,you have more fun on other maps.|
no reply about the -resource placement balance-?
|"no reply about the -resource placement balance-?"|
So much about your tactical options. A map that is uniformous in every direction - how much tactics can there be...
For example you can't try to stop your enemy to take a worthy expansion, since he will simply take the other one once you scared him off one.
|it's seems you don't understand me.in fact this parity open you evry tact.poibilities.it's not like in Arena with her corridors and her few tact.posib..if the enemy attacks quick and your not prepared you will lose everything expo-nat-main.the same thing when you try to expand on arena,the same way main-nat-next expo in the corridor.if you try everything else,it would be a hazard.because you can defend easily a wide expo.here you can chose fairly,in what direction you wanna expand,and it would be the same distance from the nat/main.|
what is balance in fact.the posibility to give evry player a fair chance.but here you have a fair chance in expanding also,not just the usual terrain balance.can't you see?
|If the enemy attacks you quick and you are not prepared, and you would lose expo-nat-main, you have lost the game. On this map just as well.|
The fair chance of expanding is given for every player on Arena as well. Every player has his nat and minonly, about equally reachable and defendable for every starting location.
So, I don't see a point in your argumentation...
|you still don't understand me.my last try.|
it's not about evry player on Arena haven't the same chance to expand.it was about the DISTANCE from the nat to evry expo that you can reach first.the DISTANCE is the same(on galaxy),so you can expand in evry direction whitout concerning about reachability.so after i have my natural safe i can expand wherever i want the DISTANCE from the natural is still the same.on arena you don't have this posibility.you always must take the next expo,cause otherwise the DISTANCE to the last expo would be bigger.
|I don't understand how it's different here than on other maps oO|
|So, your German after all.|
I did understand that very well. But it does not bring any more balance or tactical possibilities. If anything, it allows more macro, since all the expansions are equally easy to get.
And it's not like it was a big deal on maps such as Arena. You take you natural, certainly. You would do that on this map as well. Then, if you can use the minerals, you take your minonly next. If you are in need of gas, you will take another main or natural, maybe an island. If your enemy tries to attack your further off expansion, you have two possibilities: defend or counter.
It's different on this map: You will always take one of the two close gas expansions - I really dout anyone will take the minonly except for really long games - and if you are attacked at one of those, you can only defend because your enemy is right at your door.
So again: I don't see why equal distances to expansions should improve this map at all.
|finally.(es wurde langsam auch zeit).|
the function of the -balanced resource placement-is very easy to understand,it's the same function that the terrain balance have,but it goes further.it's more than the warranty that evry player have equal chances in expanding.in this case you can expand in evry direction whitout thinking about the distance,because the accessibility to evry expo near to the natural is the same.
i can't find another map with BRP,not here not anywhere else.a rare,fine attribute for a map.
if anyone can find a other map with this attribute,i would be glad to have this map
modified by Grief_Stricken
|it is come to my attention that many already play this map on asia server.so you see,quality doesnt need any publicity or prizes|
|Well, I also do see many people play the Hunters. Should say everything.|
|you suggest hunters is a bad map?in my opinion hunters and lt are the best from blizzard.these both maps have established the standards for evry good map and open the doors for new maps.it's like tryin' to laugh about Pythagoras.|
for a good-old map like hunters is,i'm not really surprised that many still play her,the most surely in games < 1v1
|Yeah, I'll leave the flaming to others...|
|lmao hunters is a terrible map. It has 0 positional balance, some nats have two entrances some have one, in some you can mine the gas from your nat others you have to build far from the nat to mine gas.|
This map is much better than hunters lol, don't compare it, you insult Fry and Valkyrion in doing so =/
Grief I think it's been made clear no one is calling this map bad, just there's nothing special about it. It's a good, standard map, just like most in our database =/
Um can you explain the BRP? I don't see what makes this map better in expo placement than any other, this map just covers itself with expos =/
|I didn't compare it to huntz, I just said that huntz is also played frequently, implying that being played a lot doesn't necessarily mean that a map is good.|
And btw, as I expected, someone came to tell you that huntz is a bad map :p It is. Whenever I start off @ 12 in a game with equally strong players and have an opponent @ 11, I know I will die soon. On the other hand, whenever it's the other way round and I have an opponent @ 12 I know he'll bite the dust. Huntz is terrible.
|spines my comment of comparison was aimed at Grief, you indicated koreans play a map regardless of it being good or not, and he began to describe the terrible map as being good like Galaxy Prime, he was doing the insulting =/|
|Ah ok :p|
|@Nmjoo if u want to understand what is BRP,don't be so lazy and read my previous comments.i explain this thing 4/5 time.it's not so hard to understand.btw this attribute makes evry map really unique.|
further i didnt compare galaxy with bgh.it would be very hard to compare this map with any other,newer or older.bgh is a very old map,with some issues,right.but don't forget this map comes out with the original game,and the blizzard people deliver these maps as a addition.they don't care to much about them.nevertheless maps like bgh and lt are the true prototypes for the later released better maps.that's why i think it's tacky to puke on bgh
|i dont understand anything your saying stricken. I dont understand why you want to compare any to blizz maps. Your losing the arguement and u choose to keep explaining.|
|We're not talking about bgh, but huntz. There is a significant differnce, in case you didn't notice yet. bgh has all chances of having tactical possibilities ripped off by being a money map, huntz COULD have tactical possibilities, but... it hasn't any.|
And about your "BRP"... We all understood what you mean by it, but nobody here seems to agree with you that it makes the map any better. That's like nice deco: Appealing, but it doesn't make the map any better considering balance.
|@nasty that's saying something!you lazy experts!if you are curious about what we talking here read step by step upwards.btw no one compares the new maps with blizz. old maps|
@spineshesth you don't have to play the lawyer for other people.you also haven't understand BRP after my first achievement(that's why you ask me again).the most still don't understand what this means,otherwise they don't need to ask.and if you don't understand something,how can you agree? btw you still can't find another map with BRP.your inflexible attitude makes you blind for the truth.a map with BRP is always a high-level map compared to the other whitout this attribut.if u really understand what BRP function is,u would have no doubts about.
if you mean with "huntz" the map -the hunters-,i really can't say too much about.i remember a map with this name in one folders,but i never play this map nor this map ever comes to my attention.btw why you don't call her "hans" -_- .
i though you talk about a common map that's why - bgh.
you say people still playing that map.fine.perhaps because this people own just the original maps - who knows? but the right question is,how many people play online bwmn maps? of course,excepting the bwmn people.
|"huntz" is a common term for the Blizzard map "The Hunters", a fairly standard 8-player map.|
"bgh" is the abbreviation of "Big Game Hunters", a version of "The Hunters" with 2 geysirs and tons of minerals, each of those with raised resource amounts. Commonly referred to as a "money map".
Yes I did understand what you mean ba "BRP" in the very beginning. It's just that nobody except for you seems to think that it has a positive effect on the map, and you failed to bring in reasons why it would do so.
It does not bring any additional tactical or strategical possibilities; in fact it even reduces them. If you have an expansion that is further away but rich, and an expansion that is rather close but not so rich, you can include the choice of expansion into your strategy.
On this map, you would simply take the expansion that is located better - as the slower race the one in the direction of the enemy, and as the faster race the away from the direct path. There is no strategy or tactics involved at all.
|spines massing expos faster than your opponent is a strategy, it's called tvp macro oO This map just makes every mu like it (except zvz probably, but imagine how easy hiding expos would be in zvz, it would make the mu a macro mu lol).|
hunz = hunters which > bgh: bgh is a noob(er) version of hunters. Now to be fair, when I had sc only on n64 (no way to get other maps) hunters was probably the map I played most, however even then (5 years before I got sc on comp) I thought the positional imbalance was stupid, without even knowing the term =/
Grief, I read all of your posts, I fail to see how this map's expo placement is superior to that of any other map, it's just a symetric map, and like any other symetric map has expos with same distances from mains etc, so what? =/
|Hiding expoes in zvz is... not present.|
a) you should be able to calculate your opponents resources well enough to see when a hatch is missing somewhere
b) a single zergling is fast and cheap.
Also, BRP doesn't stand for being able to mass expand. At least not if Grief didn't change the meaning.
|oook, so I finally downloaded Galaxy Prime and got a couple reps on it.|
Guys, I'm not impressed. Very first thing I notice is how awkward the mains are, the sl is very close to the ramp, and the way it's in the middle, it cuts it in half very awkwardly, it makes building room bad.
Second thing I notice, distances from horiz pos, and vert pos to some extent is very short. This will probably make it p>z and p>t early game, t>z too. Yes, z can rush, but I'm not talking about rushing.
Third thing I notice, the N/S expos are very hard to defend as protoss, and certainly as the other races too. There is too much room from the expos and the bridges for the bridges to be very helpful in defense, and the fact that the minerals are split in half like that makes it either impossible or needlessly expensive to place some static defense.
Fourth thing, gas issue, wtf, this isn't map making stone age -.- Even most of the kors consider the gas issue now.
Fifth thing, I was right about the middle. It plays like no part in any game. Only time where it would pretty much would be for zerg who's running from an army he can't beat, or if the players are in the corners. This leaves a pretty tight map.
I don't care if the nat is open and has three chokes, it is pretty terran friendly. The way the main wraps around the nat makes it very easy to defend the nat with tanks, and of course hard to attack. The bridges make defense for terran easy.
Also, the "great decoration" in the mains just hurts my eyes.
O and the mineral formations are very reaver friendly, and impossible to manner pylon on.
And there is a notable difference in the top and bottom mains with the ramp position being different. An inverted ramp would help. The space near the ramp is too little for some to be cut off.
|i dont even know why this map was hyped in the first place. minerals are fine btw. you should always alter between reaverfriendlyness and mannerpylonability (two words i just made up). this one is more to the reaverpart, which is the way i follow in most of my maps.|
|i think sp's space pirate symbol would make a better center. but you could say that about any space map. |
|Looks like Rush Hour and Vampire mixed together.|
|only that it was made long before vampire!!!.and the only similarity with rh is the nat... |
for me one of the best maps i ever found on bwmn. not necessary because it's revolutionary,more because it's so outstanding in evry aspect.personaly idk a 4 pl.map which has a better & balanced resource placement
|what are you talking about u.u|
just imagine a horizontal battle!
|Just like a horizontal fight on Rush Hour,still GG|
|OLD, Merry map!|
modified by JungleTerrain
|This post is not displayed due to its content|
|Not that I would agree with you,btw|
|lol, i just came in, read the argument and criticisms and typed something random, and this happens|
|and what is that btw?|
|looks like a dove.|
|Vampire 2 ..... |
|wasn't that made decades before vampire? : [ |
modified by ProTosS4EveR
--balachor vs XepOMaCTeP(1on1, 1.14)
--indriks vs DG)Rogue(1on1, 1.14)
--Hygro vs Grief_Stricken(1on1, 1.14)
--slate1 vs Grief_Stricken(1on1, 1.14)
--death.marine(korean) vs BHolder(1on1, 1.14)
--won3213 vs DG)Rogue(1on1, 1.14)
--baloch44 vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--mppxp vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--BHolder vs rhfemswor(1on1, 1.14)
--kultalas vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--ass_tree_face44 vs DG)Rogue(1on1, 1.14)
--eaw111 vs Grief_Stricken(1on1, 1.14)
--dlqnrms18 vs BHolder(1on1, 1.14)
--sunghoz1119 vs Bholder(1on1, 1.14)
--Backstor vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--ikkfdv vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--nicoleboss vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--HUN_Belfegor vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--Flamewalker vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--DG)SpoilR vs sandman87(1on1, 1.14)
--Grief_Stricken vs JYD(1on1, 1.14)
--SDS2428 vs BHolder(1on1, 1.14)
--BHolder vs shampoomilk(1on1, 1.14)
--BHolder vs PaNe(1on1, 1.14)
--jin9294 vs BHolder(1on1, 1.14)
--BHolder vs eogks3090(1on1, 1.14)
--DG)SpoilR vs lolqlolq(1on1, 1.14)
--park119x vs BHolder(1on1, 1.14)
--Smaug[HCFM] vs Rush[HCFM](1on1, 1.14p)
--Smaug[HCFM] vs Rush[HCFM](1on1, 1.14p)
--racks_30 vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.14)
--DG)ScaremongeR vs gryg...ffd(1on1, 1.14)
--BHolder vs saf875(1on1, 1.14)
--Mountainer vs DG)SpoilR(1on1, 1.15)
--DG)SpoilR vs serge(1on1, 1.15)
--KaliZ vs Grief_Stricken(1on1, 1.15)
--BHolder vs media(1on1, 1.15)
--BHolder vs TranMinhPhuc(1on1, 1.15)
--FrozenHydra vs Shambooza(1on1, 1.15)
--tosslov[FcG] vs vT.Z3zGie(1on1, 1.16)
--aG.Whom vs i_shaLL_kiLL_U(1on1, 1.16)
--QEd)RE vs MegaManX(1on1, 1.16)
--RuFF(TR) vs HowYouRemindMe(1on1, 1.16)
--Qed_Bisu vs i_shaLL_kiLL_U(1on1, 1.16)
--aG.flos vs NeO)tosslov(1on1, 1.16)
--Sky.Korean vs specialmild(1on1, 1.16)
--DreAmiN vs BobbySue(1on1, 1.16)
--HilariouS vs s0.Sauce(1on1, 1.16)
--aG.Whom vs PowerMix(OD)(1on1, 1.16)
Upload replay for this map