| Back to "beta" maps. Show all maps.
Last update for (2)Inca : 2006, 09, 10 01:23
| mapID | Mapname (comments) | map size | Author | Rating | Type | play type | | 1616 |  (2)Inca | 128*128 | Cosmi | 2.6 | beta | |
The map has been rated 21 times and got a total of 55 points |
<<>>
You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
| Cosmi | | | Maybe not innovative, but (I hope) playable and balanced.
Oh, there is one innovation - nat with distanced half-a-gas, you have to use 5 workers to use it fully. Intended to balance a bit PvZ.
Also some chokes, but not near the bases, like someone pointed out in the PvZ forum thread:-). And islands too.
Distance between mains - maybe a little longer than I intended, but rather average.
Many expos, what could lead to macro-based games.
Min wall consists of two mineral patches, worth of 40 each.
modified by Cosmi | | NastyMarine | | | cool, nice layout, but mains are too small
also i dislike those temple walls in the center.. is seems choppy | | Cosmi | | | Made main bases a little bigger, now thinking about those temple walls...
Edit: OK, I've changed them to something special. I have a slight feeling, that they favor toss in PvZ, but won't favor so much terr in PvT, as protoss force is not so wide as zerg:-).
I'm although afraid, that it will make mess with line of sight. I could change them to raised jungle, but it would look like sh*t (literally...;-) ); or water - but it would dejunglize:) the center.
modified by Cosmi | | Frank-Terrorist | | | Well... you're really tried your best to make a map in which P >> Z in PvZ, eh? The island exps, the gas at the nat, the gaia-style cliff over the expo. If you want to make toss even more powerful, you could add more space around the expos with bridges so that toss can easily cannon-up the choke, but Z needs 12 sunks to fully protect a hatch there. Right now, Z can do a pretty good job. ;)
Actually I applaud your efforts at trying to solve the P/Z balance issue. This map looks very fun/interesting to play and has great potential.
I think the temple walls are fine. T will have a hard time pushing across the bridge in the middle vs a toss, and there are a lot of ways to flank. I think carriers could potentially be very strong due to the positioning of the expos (all near cliffs or otherwise pretty tough to get to with goliaths).
TvZ is probably quite interesting on this map as well. I could see this as a map where Z does stuff like hydra-lurk with queens or a lotta drops. T early island might be a problem though... is there any way you could stop/delay it? I know the single min in the way is a bit cheesy, but sometimes its warranted. I'd have to play this more to see.
I see a symmetry error between the min lines in the right and left expansions on the jungle canopy. Other than that, it all seems good.
I love how you solve the gas issue by putting all the guysers at the expos in crappy spots so that both players MUST use 4-5 workers.
modified by Frank-Terrorist | | Cosmi | | | "I see a symmetry error between the min lines in the right and left expansions on the jungle canopy. Other than that, it all seems good."
I didn't intended to make resources symmetric, except mains and nats. Nah, I could, it won't harm and will look better. I will change this in next update.
And I have to defend myself about gas issue - I've made it on purpose only in nats:). Rest is due to strategic or pathfinding issues. But I will revise it.
OK, I will try to put minerals on the min+gas island, we will see. | | Antares | | | | hmm i dont know this nat conception could help the balance in pvz as zerg dont need two gas if he goes for mass hydra/ling and lurk, but in this case p will need more gas to get the HTs | | spinesheath | | | It won't hurt p at all to put like 5 probes at his gas. And for mass hydra/ling/lurk I'd strongly recommend taking 2 gas - especially on such a map with many chokes in the "center". A huge zergling army won't be so useful there, a good bunch of lurkers is better on such terrain.
I like how you can wall off the two semi-islands @4/10 - one gateway in the front, several cannons and a ht behind it, and you are totally safe. But the island isbig (long) enough to allow dropping.
The only problem I have with your map is the shape of the highground - It doesn't feel so good to me. But that might just be my impression, and it's no problem for gameplay anyways :p
But I, too, guess you should enlarge the mains a little. You should just try it out, though. | | Cosmi | | | Update:
mains another little bit larger;
minerals a little more symmetric;
masively doodaded dirt; I hope the doodadation didn't have any destructive effect;
walls in the middle a little reduced, made more ruins instead, so toss or terr could easily build a wall and close the enlarged gap;
min-only island is on a high ground now, it is an answer to the spinesheath's problem - I hope it looks better now - like it has two axes of simmetry. | | l[StaR]Blade | | | | wow, very many expo´s and i think this gonna be well 4 zerg | | Cosmi | | | | But only 3 for each player in open ground | | Antares | | | i dont know spines.. since the gas is very lurkable..
anyways very fresh map, surely lead to a new gameplay
modified by Antares | | spinesheath | | | | What were you referring to, Antares? That it won't hurt toss to send some more probes there? I was only talking about the distance, not the vulnerability. | | Nightmarjoo | | | "I love how you solve the gas issue by putting all the guysers at the expos in crappy spots so that both players MUST use 4-5 workers"
lol... but the gas issue is solved by making them all need 3 too. Making they players need 5 for optimum is really gonna slow z down in zvp or zvt 2 drones is a lot when you have worry about not overdoing the balance of drones to units.
I like the map though. You says it's not innovative but I can't think of something exactly the same.
I don't see how this balances zvp though. The 5gas at nat is the only blow at z imo. The temple walls in the center could create weird path issues with big fat p units. You could find your army divided and that would not help p :)
The temple walls I think help z flanking. The narrow bridges don't help p at all either. I think the 3 bridge thing is nice, but it's not helping p imo. That forces them to use the big one, but little z units and some basic unit control can have an army cross the little bridges on both sides = nice flank.
No complaints, I'm zerg :) | | Cosmi | | | As long as you are standing with your toss army between those walls or on the narrow bridges, you will have good time fighting the endless waves of zerg forces. Of course if you get flanked, you won't have an easy escape, but I do think, that it is harder to flank here for zerg forces...
You are missing the point. Zerg force IS fatter than toss - army of lings take more space than army of zealots (costing about the same); ultras and archons are the same size. Also attacks of toss have greater range (if any). Don't forget about storms in corridors and do remember about squeezed lurks there!
Now I believe that those walls will greatly help toss in late game against ultralings. It doesn't help in early/mid game when having <100 supply, but (unless lurk-containing) zerg becomes imba mostly in late game.
OK, I no longer think it's not innovative;-).
modified by Cosmi |
| Replays
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
|  |
inca(n).jpg)
