new account
list users
Map DB
Map Access
New map
Edit map

Back to "final" maps.   Show all maps.
Last update for (2)Spinel Valley2.0 : 2008, 07, 05 10:01
mapIDMapname (comments)map sizeAuthorRatingTypeplay type
3042 (2)Spinel Valley2.0 128*96NastyMarine1.4finalground

The map has been rated 89 times and got a total of 126 points


You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
Comments:   GMCS (6 elements)

Thanks for the concept spines!

I like the map alot :) Comments? gogogo
I may move the nats away from the the mains to add space for them. I think they need more room.

deco isnt done
modified by NastyMarine
Spinel: A hard glassy mineral consisting of an oxide of magnesium and aluminum; occurs in various colors that are used as gemstones
you mean spinal? ._.

I don't think the nats need moved.

Is there a small hole in the middle neutrals? Are those neutrals really necessary?

My only concern outside of pathing is that there isn't imo a lot of flank room. The only thing I can see that you could move to help with this is by moving the highground closer to the corners, as the corner expos have a lot of room, and I don't know why, seems wasteful.

Otherwise I think the map turned out pretty well.
I was thinking minerals as "spinels"
I made space for narrow unit travel in the middle. I think they add to strategic army movement and expansion options. No?

Lets play the map to test flanking :)
Pretty well done :) At first glance, it looks so different from what I had in mind, but it's the same concept ;)

I too was thinking about a little more room on the highground. If you fill the space between the two ramps to the corner expoes, it should increase the useful space by a lot.

I alow would increase the neutral building HP, either trough a second wall of buildings or through Xel'Naga Temples (which do not fit into desert terrain though^^). Otherwise terran probably can timing push through there against a zerg - but I am no 1n1 player anymore so this merely is a guess ;)
looks prett cool

only thing that concirns me is the bridge with neutral building

added a gmc
Bad choice of GMC pic - I had to search it ;)
I added 2 GMCs.

You might try to max out the ramp widths of the ramps to the middle, to allow for better flanking in lategame.
whats the point of the neutrals on the bridge?
If they weren't there, You'd have 2 exits from your main. If the whole bridge wasn't there, movement would be restricted. Imagine a terran siegeing your nat - break out and counter / flank. In zvp, both players need to be aware of the possibility that the other player can invade their main from there. Same goes for tvz.
I'd still like to see a tougher wall of neutral buildings there.

Maybe this opening is imba, hard to tell yet.
sry but thats a crap comment
So, what did you want me to say?
sth not crappy
Your comment is much better.

Well, to make this post a LITTLE more content-filled:
Asking what those Buildings are for is like asking why the ramps on 815 are so small, why the short path on Blitz/Beakdu/Bluestorm is so tight, why there are so many neutral buildings on Arkanoid, why Python is such a plain map.
It's a part of the damn concept of the map -.-
modified by spinesheath
This post is not displayed due to its content
actually id love bluestorm alot more if big units could pass the "small" path :P
It would ruin the map -_-

The neutral wall thing is pretty annoying.
Is it? Why?
just remove the bridge with the neutrals and add gas at 5/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
modified by Crackling
that would be too much gas.
I'm not removing those neutrals. It would be unbearable ZvT and TvP

That goes for the bridges too - keeping 'em
modified by NastyMarine
Actually that amount of gas is fairly standard.
you'd get my 1. vote for motm if you'd do the changes :/

otherwise no vote for you because it sucks ._.
lol no its not. not for a two player map. there are 2 too many expos on the map anyway
4 minonly on 2player map comepletly SUCK

blitzx 4 gas per player + an island to fight over

peaks of baekdu 5 gas per player

loki2 5 normal gas and a 1000gas geyser per player

bluestorm 4 gas per player

monty hall 7 gas per player (lol)

hwarangdo 4 gas per player

tiamat 5 gas per player

python 5 gas per player (with 2 players)

othello 6 gas per player (with 2 players)

wuthering heights 8 gas per player (with 2 players)

Spinel Valley 4 gas per player. Notice something? Your map is in the minority, higher gas is standard.
for (2)maps only, 3 had 4, and 4 had 5 or more.
imo the 5/11 expos aren't needed at all though.
Before you flame, I still like the map -_-
this map got enough gas! the min-onlys are very good selected good job!

monty hall 7 gas per player ^^
either way I dont think this map needs more gas. Besides the expos are very close in general so adding more gas could hurt it
I agree atm. I'm just saying, I don't think adding another geyser would hurt the map, doesn't mean it needs it though.
This map is easily split in half and smaller then those 4 player maps. If there is too much gas, turtling becomes way too attractive.

It is probably best compared to bluestorm: same size, even similar layout. The biggest difference comes from the middle expansions. As you listed, BlueStorm has 4 gas per player, the second expansion is a minonly. Really similar there. There also is an expansion a little off the battlegrounds on both maps. The 4th gas is different as it is not as defensible here. Then this map has an additional minonly. I personally don't think that this minonly will be used very much, but it doesn't hurt either. It is kinda hard to defend but in long battles that might become a very interesting attribute.

IF a geysir should be added anywhere, imo it should turn one of the gas expands into a double-gas expand. Probably the corner expoes. But I wouldn't do that right now.
modified by spinesheath
I didnt like the rep. player at 5 didnt know map AT ALL lol
@spines, but bluestorm sucks (has boring and forcefully repetetive gameplay), why would anyone want to copy it?

lol no he did, but he ignored my warning that he needs to control his scout early on, and upon seeing it run into the neutral, decided to just completely commit into his strategy of breaking it down, breaking mine down, and attacking me. I was stupid though and broke mine for him thinking I could outmicro him, but he had 4gates and better positioning so he won in the middle, and I subsequently lost (but dragged the game on for a few minutes).
I love BlueStorm
Bluestorm offers some nice micro around the 6/12 expansions and the sweetspots. I've seem maps that were less fun to watch (2n2 only at the moment so I obviously don't play Bluestorm :p).

Anyways, the gameplay should be somewhat different from bluestorm. (Especially no forced reaver in tvp ^^)
tvt and tvp on bluestorm really suck, in that they're incredibly boring to play, and worse to watch.
yep ur right marjoo
uploaded rep, i removed the bridge before playing, plz dont kill me nasty :D:D
Bridges or not, that p sucked :p
rofl. i didnt watch the rep yet. I will in a few hours.
added some reps of me raping nightmarjoo
(we played again without the bridge)

i like this map a lot but there are some things you NEED to fix.

ok lemme start:

1. you cant get a comsat at the down right main, i think you placed your minerals and then used copy/paste to mave them, scmdraft has a bug there, it places those minerals inbetween of 2 squaretiles >.<
means i'd had to lift my cc and land it 1square farer away from the minerals

2. the nats felt really TIGHT, z doesnt have enough place for sunks and as terran my units kept beeing stucked in the workerline.. your nat entrance isnt at the right place, it should be somewhat between the minerals and the gas

Free Image Hosting at

3. remove those fucking bridges.
i mean REALLY just remove them. they dont do ANYTHING except causing path issue and creating unfixable imbalances.
if a player can defend his nat withour static defence he also can just move down the fucking ramp and defend those neutrals...
if he cant do this (p beeing lurkercontained, t beeing heavy on bunkers vs z, z getting sunklurxspore vs p) he just loses the game. its not like yes more fun with opened mains when my opponent can run in a few units and beeing a bitch ._.
how is zerg supposed to react to a 1-0 speedzealot rush after fe? getting a hatch with sunks behind the neutrals? thats just weird and nonsense.
i have LOTS of examples like this which show that this just isnt working...
get rid of those bridges, nasty, plz!

4.remove those damned rocky doodads in the center of the map they are just SUCKING. the center is allready REALLY tight and its nearly impossible to get your army in position with such few ramps

5. turtleheavy gameplay: securing just !_!2!_! spots on your highground you are getting 5 fucking expansions.. thats not nice.
ok i'd reccomend you to push back the highground more towards the corners (theres some wasted place at the cornerexpos, you could use those) to make the center more open.
also place the minerals of the centerexpos on the very edge of the highground creating a katrinalike harrassthing. this will force the player owning the expansion to enter the opened center (omg to defend your highground expo you have to go to an open area and fight there, awesome!)
i would be nice to be able to move units mroe fluent, means you need more ramps but theres actually no place for them... maybe you should
turn the place between your mainonly and the 4. gas expo into a huge ramp like this:

Free Image Hosting at

(well i was lasy with copy/pasting everything right (it should be more open) but i think you got the idea

6. remove the highground rocks in the corners of the mains they are just irritating

well i think this map has REALLY A LOT of potential but if you dont fix this things it would be just another "wow maybe i'll play a game with my d- friend on it map" but nothing more...

if you dont wanna fix this i'm asking you for allowing me to make all those changes and fixes and see what it looks like...

i hope at least you read all this shit -.-

modified by Crackling
Well, you shouldn't upload games like that 5-minute thing. Sunken too late -> loss really is not worth watching, and this one really doesn't show much about the map (except for distances maybe).

I wouldn't call the other replay a "rape". No lurx, no defiler, less expansions and still the zerg was able to retaliate fairly well.
it shows somethings about unit movement and main-main distances, main-nat distances, proper building placement etc :p

also i'm making fun when i say i was raping him >.<
No sunkens. -_-
1) Guess that is a valid request^^
2) Not going to say anything against that - the nats ARE tight ^^
3) Well, a third hatch is pretty much standard, so why not place it behind the neutrals? But ya, I too am starting to think that this neutral wall wasn't the best idea. I already said that I would increase the hitpoints of these, though.
The scenario which I fear to be most problematic is a 4 rax mnm rush or something like that against fe zerg. Or hydra push against fe toss. The reason is that zealots/lings have to get close to the neutrals to attack them, thus coming into range of sunks/cans. With a decent amount of hitpoints on the neutrals you would have enough time to deal damage and get your army up. Hydras/Marines have range and can kill those neutrals off easily, and then you will need sufficient defense at two spots.
Well, enough already. Remove the bridges, Nasty ;) We have only had complaints about them, but nobody really showed that they could improve gameplay.

In return the nat entrance MUST be wider to prevent players from being contained too easily.

4) Agreed :p You are doing well so far, Crackling^^

5) I don't see how you only count 2 spots. I see 3 paths from the middle to each players side.
I too already suggested to max out the with of those ramps, though. There is a little bit of space left you could use. Especially the ramps at 6/12 could be widened.
That "having to go into the center to defend the expansion" thing actually was one of my intentions when I designed the map. You are right, moving the resources closer to the cliffs could increase the importance of this.

6) Well whatever. Mains feel too small?
so i'm right in every point? :o

no mains didnt feel to small but those rocks are just annoying, theres no reason to leave them there

like this: Free Image Hosting at
modified by Crackling
The short game I didn't want to make sunks because then my nat would be ridiculously small.

Second game, Crackling told me not to make lurkers since he couldn't make a 2nd comsat, so I went Crazy Zerg for the first time instead of what I'm used to. That game was actually really telling about the map. It was basically impossible to position my army correctly to setup any kind of flank, and I'm sure the same problem exists in zvp and pvt.

Basically, everything I was worried about in my intitial comments has turned out pretty much true from testing -.- Both me and Crackling agree with all of those things. I can't imagine how annoying the map would be with those neutrals. If you add more health, then you just have more pathing issues for longer. If Nasty placed the nat right then he wouldn't need a second entrance.

Also, the map seems to play like Bluestorm, like I thought it would, where both players take half the map and sit for an hour because neither can position their army correctly to actually attack the other. Maybe having larger chokes would help, normal sized ramps are not the best chokes for moving your whole army on lol.
I like the bridges :o Its a major part of the map.

I'll remove the rock doodads in hte center.

I'm going to widen the highground area.

I'll expand the natural a bit more for more room.

I will also widen the ramps leading into the middle but not too much.
have you ever PLAYED the map lol? T___T
yep. It plays just like bs if you think about it. rally to your nat or outside of it. This would only have to occur early game as mid-game progresses the bridges will have a more satisfying affect (attack tactics and obv unit movement). No?

You might as well ask the koreans to make the cliff hole in BStorm wider so ultras can fit through it.
modified by NastyMarine
Updated map
whats wrong now?
Look gmc. :b If u delete that u can make bigger ramps to middle and middle come bigger too.
why did you choose this kind of setup for the cornerexpos?

also, place the minerals of the minonly+4.gas more towards center

and add gas to 11+5

Great Siabbo. Delete the other expnasion as well and kill the whole concept of the map -.-

rofl at siabbos comment ^^. it would spoil balance alot
I was just laughing at the selected edits, and more importantly at what wasn't edited. Also, the map visually doesn't look as good, edges are pretty linear on top of relatively boring/ugly terrain decoration.
New edits:

Moved the gas expos on the cliffs to the 12 and 6 oclock positions.

the new min only expos have only 1000 minerals per patch.

the new gas expos have a 7000 gas amount for the geysers.
why did you increase gas amount?

even when you take it as 3. expo gas wont end before like all minerals on the map are mined out TT
its still nice :)
tho it needs better decoration
I dunno how this effects balance. I'm tempted to like it oO
well i played some games vs nasty last night... after he tried a valkrush he explained me that its not cheese but just a BO and its good. he also doesnt think that a macrogame shows more of the map than a valkrush.
after giving him various examples why he should remove the bridges (i also abused them in our games, just look reps) he was like "OMG ONLY BECAUSE YOU WON VS ME YOU THINK YOU ARE ALLMIGHTY SC GOD WHO ARE YOU TO TELL WHAT IS GOOD WHAT NOT"


spines plz help? -__-
Well, Valk rush sure is unusual, but I recently even saw it in a replay from ;) That terran didn't attack until he had a whole bunch of valks, though. And he lost^^

Anyways, I have to agree with you that valk/drop play doesn't show much about the map. Terrain is pretty meaningless in such a game.

I actually don't think that the bridges brought you the victory. You basically already had won at those points. They surely allowed you to finish the game faster, though.
Also, Nasty surely didn't draw any advantages from his bridge.
hey ... guys give some ideas for White Forge my new map i'm sure that whit your help it will become a great map
btw about ur "map testing", u play in iccup or europe? id like to play with u, im a decent player ^^ (that doesnt valkrush cuse thats bad vs everything but 2hatch guardian rush thats also bad vs everything)
I'm not going to reiterate what was said between crackling and I b.c its was stupid. He got angry b/c I was presenting logical examples for ingame scenarios and he got bm and left. You have to agree with spines - you won those games before those attacks on those bridges. It wasnt as if there had been ONE attack that dismantled my game with those bridges.

Losing with 1raxvalk wont stop me from trying to perfect the BO. Its an untapped resource.
sorry for the OT, but would you post/link the BO?
I have a hard time seeing how would a valk rush would be a good idea.
It could work for a FE if mutas didn't came earlier (dunno, maybe going 2 port valk instead of 2 fact tank? :O) and for a 1 base i don't see how it's better than 2 port wraith (it needs more tech/more expensive/come later, they are slower, cant kill drones, harder to micro due to long attack animation, die to scourge).

Also, it's better to test one thing at a time. If it's a new map, i think it's better to play one of the standard openings.
So instead of testing viable builds on the map, like seeing how detrimental the bridges are to the map, you worked on a valkyrie rush? Whyyyyyyyyy?
I had teh urge to. no other explanation really
Well, since I wasn't all that happy with the bridges either, and imo the ramps had to be widened, and Nasty seemed to be done with the map and I had some ideas that could improve the map and I have quite some time at my hands and I like writing long, annoying senteces...

I created another version of Spinel Valley. Of course it is just an edit of Nasty's version which already was very nice. His deco also looked better ;) Please don't get angry, Nasty; but since I felt that my concept didn't turn out as great as one would expect from a spinesheath-concept, I had to take some actions ^^

- Middle is wider, the plateaus are about the same size as before.

- Resources in the middle closer to the edge

- slightly fairer gas positions on the non-main-bases :p

- less unbuildable space near the minonly (remeber bluestorm and what zergs do at the minonly)

- gas @ 6/12, but now with a cliff - makes it kind of a neutral expansion because both players can deal damage to it easily

- path around the plateaus to the corner expoes

- WIDER RAMPS! Special spines edit! Desert sure is an ugly place for custom terrain...
The 2 ramps to the middle + the path to 6/12 together are about 33% wider than bluestorms middle.

So, what do you think about it, guys?
modified by spinesheath
modified by Nightmarjoo
not good :(
The nats are still awkward, the corner expos are ridiculous, they have even more room than before when they actually needed less. I can't possibly fathom how zerg will keep his 3rd gas in zvt.

I like 12/6.

How about, removing the farther ramp from the corner, (ramp on right for SW and left for NE), and tightening that new path?
The corner expo will still have too much room, but I can't really see the room being better allocated to those plateaus either.

Visually/structurally it's kind of terrible. Spines, you need to work on your 2008 designing skills, because you've used antique 2005 visuals on the map ._.
Ok, I'll think about that third gas in zvt.

In what way are the nats awkward?

About the design comment: rofl.
But ok, please name 5 "2008 design" maps that have recommendable design.

Crackling: You should know better. Put some content into your comments.
what if...

look at gmcs.
I think the edits make the map bland :/
oh shit we did it

"NastyMarine United States. June 26 2008 17:41. Posts 487 PM Profile Blog Quote

Yeah I'm thinking about going to 2.0 and removing the bridges.

I may widen the middle ramps and remove the second mineral onlies on each side as well."

Nasty, if you do edit the map, I reccomend working on the edges, a lot of them are straight and/or ugly (mostly in the middle and on the plateaus).
By the way, I am still waiting, Crackling and Nightmarjoo.

"In what way are the nats awkward?

About the design comment: rofl.
But ok, please name 5 "2008 design" maps that have recommendable design.

Crackling: You should know better. Put some content into your comments."


The nats are awkward because of how the ramp enters the base, with the gas partially in the way. Making sunks, or cannons/gate for FE blocks a lot of the room, making the nats hard to use. There isn't room for your army at all either.

Taklamakan is ok visually, Colosseum is ok, Triple Flow, Morris Plains is ok, Shine, Iron Curtain, are all decent maps visually.

For non desert maps, see stuff by Crackling, Testbug, and Protoss4ever. My own (newer) stuff isn't bad either.
tkt and lt have by fat better decoration skill than me
And Nightmarjoo, radiance doesn't look "good" at all. xD
Not a terrible edit, but I liked the other version a lot more ^^


- Removed the bridges + neutrals.

- Removed second mineral onlies.

- Added more width to the ramps in the middle.

expansions just like blue storm :)
this map might just be better than blue storm, i mean the concept
I am trying hard to find out what these maps have in design that mine doesn't...
A few more curvy lines? Loooong ramps, no curyness kk?
Thin lines of cliffs at the edges of the highground? Can't do that in the middle because the expansions are meant to be easily harrassed. Could add a little bit next to the nats.

Increased Brightness? Hell yeah!

And seriously, collosseum? wtf.

Anyways, Crackling you still didn't tell me what made you say "not good :("

About the recent edit: Sorry, but I don't like that AT ALL.
Btw, no more ramp width than in my version, but the size of the small ramp makes it kind of useless in lategame.
Two words to solve all mapping problems:

Visual Appeal
modified by NastyMarine
Can you add obs Nasty?

edit: fixed obs
modified by NastyMarine
About the valks: Even progamers use them every now and then:

Jaedong vs Nada

modified by spinesheath
yeah, light also used them against jaedong on katrina (without much success).
Still, that's really not a good game to choose to say that pros use valks. It was a tournament that was just for show with new totally unbalanced maps. Bisu used scouts against Nada in that tourney...

edit: btw, this is the regular vod
Jaedong vs NaDa @ SuperFight 5 (Game 1)

modified by Yakkul
Who cares^^ The valks totally stopped that muta harrass after a single SCV kill ;)
I plan on adding more decoration
maybe a FeedSomebodySSoul line?
modified by testbug
umm no rocky ground fits it better imo
what a terrible rating :o
+10 from me ;)
It's better now. Now there are those big ramps too. Thats good.

-- vs fonger(1on1, 1.15)
--By.Alice vs ASK-_-KEY(1on1, 1.15)
--Nb.Crackling vs Nb.Maytoss(1on1, 1.15)
--Crackling vs Nightmarjoo(1on1, 1.15)
--Crackling vs Nightmarjoo(1on1, 1.15)
--crackling vs nastymarine(1on1, 1.15)
--crackling vs nastymarine(1on1, 1.15)
--SouL)Z(Alice vs Nb.Crackling(1on1, 1.15)

Upload replay for this map
Add your comment:

Because of heavy spam on the map comments, it is needed to be logged in to post. We are sorry that this has to be done because nothing else stops spam bots
random map
Newest updates:
  (4)Nocturne of Sh..
  (2)Odd-Eye 4.2c
  (2)Lobotomy 2.82
  (3)Ra 0.66
  (2v6)Rich vs Lean
  • month 6:
      (2)Butter 2.0b
  • MOTW
  • week 2021.01:
      (3) Lambda 1.0
  • Main Forum
  • New B..(Kroznade)
  • Magna..(addressee)
  • No Fo..(Pension)
  • Share..(Shade)R)
  • Feedback
  • This s..(triller1)
  • Rotati..(triller1)
  • Off Topic
  • scm dr..(addressee)
  • Real L..(Pension)
  • Vetera..(ProTosS4Ev)
  • Starcraft 2
  • announ..(triller1)
  • STARCR..(triller1)
  • Search Forum
  • x  
  • How to make larvae spawn at the bottom right corner  
  • Worker pathing guide - How to debug and balance resour
  • Competition:
  • Innovative Naturals Competition  
  • Tourney Map Pack Aspirant Suggestions  
  • Maps That Need A Remake  
  • Think Quick Map Contest ($100 prize)