| Nightmarjoo | | |
| lol I really like it, the only thing I notice is that the nat looks very hard to fully protect as zerg in early game. Neutrals could eat up some room, and leave the possibility for being destroyed later on. |
| Alumni | | |
suggestions/comments?
i think this is my best map yet and that there isn't much that i'd want to change because i've tested putting the neutral blocks on other paths and this one doesn't cause issues but makes the choke easier to defend with that dweb :)
the battle isn't all taking place in the middle either because the exps are in the open.
GAS Amounts:
mains - 5000
nats - 5000
2, 4, 8, 10 - 2500
corner islands - 5000 |
| LostTampon | | |
oh, very good looking map :)
nightmarjoo is right, the nat is very difficult to defend, also the middle is too tight imo, mayb you could widen the bridges a bit? :)
+ why is there a mineral at the island expos? placing minerals like these should prevent terran from using a cc to land there, so he has to build dropships. you can still land with a cc at the island and build a worker :P |
| Alumni | | |
The way this map is made, it isn't meant to have huge battles in the middle, that's why all exps, nats, middle parts are the same size... once the neutrals are destroyed during mid game, it REALLY opens up and battles won't just take place in the middle, it'll be at all the exps as well because of the room.
modified by Alumni |
| Lancet | | |
| Very pretty map, you could make the nat have one choke, for example the one with the dweb. |
| Alumni | | |
Update 1:
Made middle bridges as wide as they could be without messing up design (dirt #10 pothole doodads surrounding each hexagon). They are now twice as wide as the bridges being blocked by neutrals.
Eliminated Dwebs at choke of nat to discourage turtling.
Added neutrals blocking the side entrances to each exp making the nat more easier to defend.
Corner islands are fixed in terms of making a cc land there impossible. The mineral blocks are needed because it would give T advantage not only in having a base unreachable by land but also having more gas since the geysers there have 5000 rather than the exps just having 2500.
modified by Alumni |
| LostTampon | | |
yeah looks now very good imo :)
oh you forgot to remove 2 doodads^^ |
| DeSade | | |
| just cool |
| Alumni | | |
Doh! Yes I know I know.. I'm a noob/rookie haha, I'll take out the 2 doodads ^^
comments?
modified by Alumni |
| Lancet | | |
| If someone wants to turtle they are not going to say something like "oops there is no dweb at my choke, sheez I can't turtle". Elliminating that dweb will not discourage turtling, I suggest you put it back. |
| Alumni | | |
Obviously a person can still turtle and just build up, but with the dweb there, it makes defending the choke alot easier. Additionally, the dweb will tighten up the middle... If a player was to wall in or make the choke even tighter, they'd do it in the early game and with the dweb it's like, 'no rush 10mins'. Keep in mind Xel'Naga temples are 5000HP so rushing would almost become completely useless.
modified by Alumni |
| Alumni | | |
anyone want to help me test this map?
modified by Alumni |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| what time can you play? |
| Alumni | | |
whenever you want, it's the weekend :)
any bnet server (except asia gateway), i have Alumni account on all the other gateways.
I'll be on US East today because least amount of lag for me. Just msg Alumni on bnet, I can switch to US West if requested :P
modified by Alumni |
| the Golden | | |
| How will zerg defend his nat zvt without 3hatching? Even if he does then his defense is very far from his main or nat. |
| Alumni | | |
you don't have to necessarily triple hatch to defend the nat... the third hatch could go where the nat is defending the choke to your main. don't be too greedy now, saviOr lost some of his matches cuz he risked it. you have more than enough room to build in the main and your nat can defend your main, just time when terran attacks and sunk up, flank him with lings by hiding them at the sides where the temples are and having a group at your nat. if by then you have lurkers or mutas, use them too... Zerg is my chosen race so I know what I'm doing.
Think about the other matchups? it's the same, if terran or toss want to try and defend that choke, it's still pretty far from their nat and mains too. the nat and exps are large because they become part of the battlefield especially when the neutrals are destroyed. This isn't the standard epic battle in the middle type of map.
It's just a matter of adjusting to the new gameplay. From my understanding, bwmn looks for new/fresh concepts and designs that will change gameplay from the usual style AS WELL AS provide balance.
If everything is too easy to protect, it = macrotastic. I don't want the map to just benefit macro players but also to give the micro intensive players a chance too so you can play both styles, macro and passive or micro and aggressive.
modified by Alumni |
| Crimson)S(hadow | | |
what do you guys mean by its hard to protect?
it needs a lot of sunks? T can just run ther m&m force to the main? |
| Alumni | | |
Crimson)S(hadow, i don't understand what you mean because you have broken sentences or they're not very specific.
i was saying earlier to put the third hatch at the choke of the MAIN so two hatcheries at the nat... if the player can secure the choke of the NAT leading to the middle, good shit, start macroing.
Update:
ok so the nat was still damn hard to defend if you don't put the second hatch at the choke of the nat leading to the middle, but then you slow down eco by expanding to the nat with the third hatch... took out 4 temples and replaced with dwebs, made the nat and main easier to defend with the neutral placed there.
modified by Alumni |
| Alumni | | |
| i guess this map isn't worthy of more attention either. :( i really want to make this map amazing. |
| Lancet | | |
The issue is you have an expossed nat. One way to deal with this is to place some extra doodads or sprites close to the minerals plus gas in the nat to create an artificial choke there (I did this in my map Ryleh). Having said that I liked it better with the two temples blocking the extra chokes and the single dweb in the central choke. A 3 hatch strategy is perfectly valid, don't let that bother you.
Hey, could you watch some of the Oracular Visions replays? I uploaded a zerg vs toss rep with the 3 hatch strategy. Do you think you will be able to play the map with a friend and upoload the replay?
Thanks.
modified by Lancet |
| Alumni | | |
Lancet: the way i set it up now is because nightmarjoo wrote it on gmcs, so your suggestion about using neutral buildings to create an artifical choke is already being put to use as the temple placed there makes it more difficult for mnm to sneak through into the main because the nat will be defending it. this was what was ultimately decided after experimenting a few times with neutral building blocks at different chokes.
i've played a few games on it with people and against the computer (nothing that makes a good replay) now you can fully protect yourself with two hatch or three hatch. just gotta clog up where the temple is :)
modified by Alumni |
| pOOwarriOr- | | |
I think that if you added another temple at the nat right next to the existing one (horizontally), then any attacks would be forced to go through a FE zerg's sunkens. It might be a little cramped at first but the Z can kill it after the early game anyway.
Aside from that, well-made map. |
| lancet | | |
Yes, I realize what the function of the temple next to the main's choke is, what I meant was that the nat itself was expossed as there is no choke defending it, it can be attacked from many directions (left, front, right). But then again, that's just life, and there are ways to deal with that.
modified by lancet |
| Lancet | | |
| Also, your replays do not need to be good, they merely should illustrate certain aspects or strategies that you consider keys in your map. |
| Alumni | | |
well i'd rather have good replays that last at least 10-15minutes :P
i tried putting another neutral (i tried warp gates and protoss temples beside the xel'naga temple at the nat but it's not ling tight when i place them one beside another unless i stack which would look damn ugly and unnatural. :-/ |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| I think you might be best off just changing the concept a little bit. Redoing the nat so it is more like a normal nat would imo be the best solution, but that's boring =/ |
| Alumni | | |
yeah, i'll keep working on this though to make it work because i really like the design/concept. plus, no one likes boring hehe.
modified by Alumni |
| Alumni | | |
update:
ok the nat is defendable! to avoid overloading on xel'naga temples i changed 4 of them to be protoss temples and since they are only 1500hp each, i stacked 2 onto there making each protoss temple block 3000hp.
technically i have 8 temples in there then... hehe |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| how bout a neutral to the side of the gas to keep mnm from running behind it early on |
| Alumni | | |
that's only the case for player 1 though, where would i place the neutral for player 2? could you possibly gmc it? :D
edit: oh man, sweet idea, i don't think it'll have to be that high in hp either... maybe a couple warp gates or even.. that neutral nexus may work too
modified by Alumni |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| k gmcs has been raep't |
| Alumni | | |
done and done, took a lil longer to update because i played a game vs computer on it lol but the neutrals added are ling tight :D
modified by Alumni |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
lol interesting choice of neutral buildings ><
I don't the xelnagas need to be as such, perhaps a smaller hp neutral for that.
Looks good, looks playable even ;) |
| NastyMarine | | |
i dont like those neutrals.. very unappealing imo. Try a less common building. It just really funny :/
The rest of the map is wonderful though. very cool and stylish as flo would say. i like it :) |
| Alumni | | |
| yeah the bright yellow colours don't fit in with the dull or dark or blue neutrals... ok i'll see what i can do :o hehe |
| Alumni | | |
| alright, i used a good old min block heh |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| hey, make the gas on the symmetrically same side, not both on left, gas issue is less important when concerning the nats, and there is now a significant difference in the layout because of the gas positioning. |
| Alumni | | |
i was actually thinking about moving the gas placement in the nat as well, cuz now both nats are protected differently.
edit:
updated: booyakasha! the nats both protect/play the same now.
modified by Alumni |
| pOOwarriOr- | | |
| Very nicely done with the new neutrals and mineral walls. |
| RaDiX | | |
| Make it 4 player map, and i'll love it :). May I make 4 player vers. of this map for you alumni? :) |
| Excalibur | | |
| Yeah a 4p would definately be nice |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
looks playable now, message me for testing sometime :)
idk about (4), I think this is a better (2)concept. |
| Alumni | | |
well i made the map originally wanting to make it 4 players but the concept and size/shape of the exps wouldn't support 4 players well imo. The broken cliff designs are flowing too right now with the exp in the corners :)
i'll msg you tomorrow joel, big house party and plans for goin out tonight to get sloshed so ya lol playing me at 3-4am either when i get home would be a good idea either hahaha |
(2)Mount ShakurasMount Shakuras(n).jpg)
