|Back to "beta" maps. Show all maps.|
Last update for (2)Arid Pass : 2017, 06, 09 19:39
|mapID||Mapname (comments)||map size||Author||Rating||Type||play type|
|4945|| (2)Arid Pass|| 128*128||Solstice245||0.1||beta||ground|
The map has been rated 45 times and got a total of 5 points
You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
|I'm a newcomer to BW map-making, (Coming from the SC2 map-making scene) and this is one of my first projects. I don't really know very many of the specifics or particularities of BW maps, so any tips to improve the play-ability of my maps are appreciated.|
EDIT: To clarify, the doodad structures at the main are NOT destructible. The main has 1 solitary entrance.
modified by Solstice245
|Some things that you may find different from SC2:|
You need expansions with tight chokes/ramps for players to defend.
128˛ is too big for most 2 player concepts. You could reduce dead spaces around the corners a lot. 128x112 or 112x128 are pretty much the standard formats for 2 player maps nowadays.
On 2 player maps it is also a good idea to keep the shortest rushing root rather long and/or restricted.
Are you using one of the newer ScmDraft test versions? Have you checked that your ramps have correct terrain levels and there are no tiles which unintentionally have cover effect?
You also need to improve your clutter terrain. Right now there seem to be lots of drop holes.
|"On 2 player maps it is also a good idea to keep the shortest rushing root rather long and/or restricted."|
Any ideas about how to go about making the route between the mains longer?
"Are you using one of the newer ScmDraft test versions? Have you checked that your ramps have correct terrain levels and there are no tiles which unintentionally have cover effect?"
I believe I am using the latest for SCMDRAFT 2 (O.8), and I am also basically directly copying ramps from ramp templates I've downloaded from this site.
"You also need to improve your clutter terrain. Right now there seem to be lots of drop holes."
I miss the pathing brush from SC2 editor :( I'll have to be more careful next time I suppose, redoing clutter terraining is a real pain.
|Newest version of SCMDraft is 0.9, am on my phone now so I can't give a DL link, however you can find it on Staredit.net if you skim the pages.|
It has some very good improvements and allows ramps to be debugged.
Unfortunately you cannot trust the ramps that are put on this site. Those were uploaded a long time ago, before debugging ramps was possible. You need to check them manually.
Also when it comes to 2 player maps there are 2 main ways of dealing with distances between players. It is almost never a good idea to have a straight path from one player to another in 2 player maps because pathing becomes too linear. This is bad for 2 reasons: 1) matchups of mobile vs immobile race, the mobile race is weaker in head-on engagements and needs to be able to retreat without giving up ground to the other player. 2) pathing should be more interesting than just 1a2a3a to the opponents base. 1 linear path = definition of linearity.
Here are the 2 main ways in which 2 player maps deal with this:
1) big path/small path --> as in Blue Storm, or Peaks of Baekdu. Basically you have a direct path between players that is short but only allows small units to pass through. This means players can still rush, allowing zealots, zerglings and marines to pass through, but big units have to take the other big path. The Big path should be big enough for large armies to have easy movement, and should be as interesting as possible with side paths connecting to it with different strategic options.
2) 2 alternate paths --> as in HearrBreak ridge. My map Resonance has a mild version of this concept. Basically 2 paths that lead to the other player but diverge around the area that "belongs" to the corresponding player. This way, players run the risk of being counterattacked if they plow through one of the paths as the other player can completely avoid the other's army and go directly for the base.
Another way to do this is to mix the two, as in Bloody Ridge, or Loki II, which have 2 big paths on the sides and a small linear path down the middle.
Those are just some ideas based on what's been done in the past.
modified by JungleTerrain
|I suggest, first making a normal map without any edition or what not as an eraser, don't try using the ramps yet, give them a more Natural feel, look there's the map I made called Little Desert, it's a kinda starting point on what to do, although there are better maps out here, but as an example you can try using that but only example, anyways what you need to check out when making maps:|
1) Mains have a Natural and both must not be easily able to siege with tanks.
2) Thirds and Fourths are the same and they shouldn't be too close nor too far away from your main and Natural.
3) For resource placement follow the standard gas on top and on left for better gas mining rate, mineral gathering close to the starting location but not too far.
4) Ample mid space for units to be able to fight without problems.
5) Balancing always comes with choke points, which can be manually made or can be already made by the ramps thise choke point generally consiste of 1 barrack and 2 supply depots or any other building be it zerg or protoss.
6) Doodads, Sprites and so are the last thing you need to worry about unless they are bridges or ramps.
|“Any ideas about how to go about making the route between the mains longer?|
Pushing the nats all the way to the edge of the map is one way.
You can also place nats closer to the corners, but this is very dependant on the layout and only doable with certain map concepts and comes with its own load of disadvantages (hard to make a good choke, hard to place good muta/ovi cliffs).
You can also just make the shortest route more sinuous.
A popular way, probably the most popular, is to restrict the direct rushing path to tight chokes and normal sized ramps that most units can only pass one-by-one or even use constricted chokes and ramps that only let small units pass through (Blue Storm is the most prominent example).
Another design you can go for is to place main and natural along the same edge of the map with the natural choke pointing along the same edge, making the map S-shaped in structure (Match Point and Benzene popularized this kind of design).
“I believe I am using the latest for SCMDRAFT 2 (O.8),
The in-developement versions for 0.9 can be found here. You should really need those as they actually give you overlays for all tile flags, meaning you can control for their properties.
“and I am also basically directly copying ramps from ramp templates I've downloaded from this site.
Don't do that.
I am serious.
Any one can post anything on this site.
And good intentions do not make for good results, unfortunately.
Most of these ramp packs are ages old and just represent what the creator a the time liked the look of or is just naively copied from Kespa maps – without any regard for in-game mechanics, which usually means those ramps have at the very least a completely broken terrain level structure, causing random blindness and miss-chance for units on the ramp. This is bad, to put it mildly, as ramps tend to be core strategic elements in maps and players should not be misled as to whether they have high ground advantage or not...
“I miss the pathing brush from SC2 editor :( I'll have to be more careful next time I suppose, redoing clutter terraining is a real pain.
No such thing in BW. However, post-editing with the tileset-indexed palette can achieve much the same effect for you (unfortunately the option to display walkability inside the palette has not been implmented yet. It will probably come though).
modified by Freakling
|So, with ramp issues, are there any existing packs you guys might recommend as the best for play-ability? Or is it that there is more "manual" case by case work to be done on ramps?|
|For Desert terrain, you can use the ramps from (3)Légionnaire as a starting point. Those are not derived from the standard ramps, though, but designed to match the tighter ramps typical for most tilesets.|
|My ramps from (4)Over Under are another option. I've had those debugged as well (except for that 1 little micro tile that is in one of the tiles used for the bottom of the ramp, there is no other good alternative though as far as I can see).|
Or you can make your own. I recommend getting the new SCMDraft and you can check terrain levels on your own.
Another option is ramps using desert sand transition, like the ones used in (2)Spinel Valley, or on my super old map (4)Naous. I personally don't like the look of these that much but it's another option. Just make sure they are unbuildable and height levels are good (you can only check with the new SCMDraft).
|So, I downloaded the latest version of SCMDraft, and I've been doing some debugging on ramps, and I think I've mostly fixed them, since some of them did have problems. (Mostly the inverted ramps)|
I've also been working on the layout some more, spit-balling for the most part. I've made some of the chokes a bit smaller, added a blue storm esque center, and moved the ramps that was at the outside area of the natural while making the ramp up smaller than the one going down.
Here's a pic.
|You also need some longer but comfortably wide attack route where large armies can easily move. So don't make everything too choky.|
|Not bad. Although you have to think about where Zerg is going to get a third gas and how they are going to defend it. Zerg players hold their ramps vs Terran usually through 1 choke and placing lurkers there. Having more than 1 choke is fine but the high ground expo here has 3 ramps leading to it and 2 of them are wider than normal. It can be difficult to defend as a zerg, and also protoss against a zerg.|
|Changed up the ramps on the high-ground 3rd again, and also made one of the ramps to the side high-ground areas wider.|
I'm kinda wondering what you guys thoughts are on the other 3rd though. Is it to vulnerable? Is it to far from the main? etc.
modified by Solstice245
|I went ahead an updated the uploaded versions.|
|The third looks better, although I think it would be great if the low ground gas expansion at 3 and 9 could also be possible thirds (as in, having better defined chokes), so that players are not just pigeon-holed into having 1 option for a third gas. I can actually see terran going for the 3 and 9 more than zerg, and protoss could expand in either direction I suppose.|
Also, you have enough room at the corners of the map to add another expo per player, or you could add another feature to the map, or even allocate more space to already existing features of the map. I think it would be good practice to put unused space to some purpose, you will have to do this a lot as you get used to sizes and proportions for BW mapmaking.
|I did originally have an additional expansion in the corners, but I kinda thought they were redundant, so I removed them, but I couldn't really think of anything else to use that space for, so it's just dead space for now.|
Now, concerning the low-ground 3rd/4th base, I'm thinking it could maybe be a tad closer to the natural, and I suppose I would just leave it with 1 choke still, but any other ideas are welcome.
|What exactly do you mean when you refer to an expansion as "redundant". Unlike in SC2, in BW you hardly ever run out of incentive to grab another expansion whenever possible.|
|I suppose redundant was a poor choice of words, but I just felt it wasn't necessary. Especially since back when it was there, it was effectively 3 bases behind 1 choke. (There was yet another base right horizontal to the high-ground 3rd just past the ramp)|
modified by Solstice245
|That's a symptom of a bad pathing layout then.|
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