| Back to "experimental" maps. Show all maps.
Last update for (2)Mind Games : 2007, 05, 03 02:46
| mapID | Mapname (comments) | map size | Author | Rating | Type | play type | | 2182 |  (2)Mind Games | 128*128 | Lancet | 2.1 | experimental | |
The map has been rated 9 times and got a total of 19 points |
<<>>
You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
| Lancet | | | This is the second map in what will be my "Balance? Schmalance!" trilogy (the first was the Z v Z map "Conflict Resolution"). It is, of course, a Protoss vs Protoss map (Zerg and Terran play at your own risk).
The strategy to follow is obvious, mind control the neutral Zerg, Terran and Protoss units. Don't think for a moment that you can play this map without doing this as all the neutral units are "hero" units with beefed up hit points and all their abilities functional. The units include defilers, queens, ultralisks, one overlord (and a Terran command center), drones, battlecruisers, science vessels, ghosts, SCVs and carriers. Just a few of these units in the right combination can win a battle against a Protoss army that does not have any of its own.
All the neutral units are located on triple islands E and W reached by bridges. The South main has direct access to the neutrals in the E while the North main has direct access to the neutrals in the West. Direct access to the other's main neutrals is prevented by a small "wall" of 3 neutral dark templars that are invisible on the map in play mode (see gmcs) unless you have detectors (thanks for this idea goes to "ProTosS4EveR"). This map is ideal for Protoss players who want to complement their attacking and defending units with those of other races. Enjoy!
modified by Lancet | | Nightmarjoo | | | map looks like hell on protoss =/
Looks sloppy and not very well executed imo.
Also decoration is sorely lacking.
Concept is interesting but I think it could be better executed. | | Lancet | | | I know the "room for flanking argument" but Protoss will be playing another Protoss, no problem there. Anyway, when you mind control a carrier with 500 shield and 800 HP or a battlecruiser with 800 HP gameplay can change dramatically.
All my maps seem to look "sloppy" and "not well executed". I beg to differ. I put a lot of thought into my maps, I literally bang my head against the wal to think "out of the box", I draw them before making them, I go through several versions before the final. "Different" is not "sloppy" and "not well executed".
As to adding EVEN MORE doodads (there are quite a few), where? If I place them in the open corridors they will be even tighter. | | Nightmarjoo | | | decoration is not just adding doodads -.-
as for flanking, have you seen pp dunaj tactics? Dunaj vs BlackMaster http://www.sclegacy.com/mirror2.php?file=/replays/pp04 - (8)dunaj_tactics.rep. Best pvp I've ever seen, the first hour or so atleast... I'm pretty sure you'd have to patch back a bit to see it, probably 1.11 or 1.12a or so. | | Lancet | | | | I have seen it, probably not the best but certainly the longest! I think that it was voted as one of the "pimpest" plays. As the game shows flanking does not necessarily have to take place in open ground, you can flank using converging narrow corridors too (which my map has). But the point is that the hero units in my map change the dynamics of the game, forget standard theory crafting. As to decor, yes I know that you can add decor with other things than doodads. I used a lot of the available space in the dirt terrain placing mud. If I place any more I start to change the contours of the hills. I am tired now, have to go get some sleep. | | Excalibur | | | This is mind control heavan.
Id like to see two good spell using toss play eachother on this. Not too many people put faith in spell casters in SC in general, and i can see how your focusing on the impact they can have.
I do however agree this could be done better on deco.
But if someone doesnt play P, they can still burn the bridges and kill all the neutrals before P gets them. | | Lancet | | | OK,OK, I wil work on the deco.
As to killing the neutrals, yes I envisioned that that was a possible strategy in P v P. What you are saying is different though. You are saying that Zerg or Terran can beat Protoss on this map by killing the neutrals (what exactly do you mean by "burn the bridges?). That is an interesting comment but I made this map on purpose so that that strategy would be highly unlikely to work.
first the neutrals are hero units with high HP, (and shields in the case of the carriers) they take a long time to kill unless you really mass your units attacking them. Second there are two groups of them E and W very far appart, it is very unlikely that you will be able to get to all of them. And thirdly and obviously, while you are devoting units to attack the neutrals Toss can send an army your way and obliterate you! Alternatively, Toss can fight you for the neutrals by defending them.
Remember all it takes is a single Dark Archon jumping out of a shuttle using mind control and then any of the following units can be yours up and running and ready to go with spells and everything:
Carrier-800 HP 500 shields
Battle Cruiser-850 HP
Science Vessel-800 HP
Ghost-250 HP
Defiler-250 HP
Queen-300 HP
Ultralisk-800 HP
Overlord-1000 HP
Also damaging the command center and mind controlling the queen and the overlord will allow you to get up to 30 infested terrans at a time! Finally, if you want to gain access to unit production of another species there are also drones and SCVs.
In my opinion you would have to be the most incompetent of protoss players to lose against Terran or Zerg in this map.
There are also other strategical and tactical aspects of the map design that may be obvious with respect to the neutrals but I will mention then in a later post. | | DeSade | | | It's not that difficult to beat toss on this map because the layout doesnt favour toss at all imo.
A terran has quite good chances of winning if he doesnt wait for the toss to get many dark archons.
Teching to mindcontrol early (energy takes quite a long time to be filled too) would leave the toss quite vulnerable to a good executed fe>5fax push or something like that. | | Lancet | | | I disagree, you don't have to tech to mind control early (even against a protoss). If Terran is not trying to kill the neutrals you can proceed normally taking your nat and exploiting the early advantage toss always has against terran players. You will then proceed naturally to dark templars and then dark archons. Think about it,Terran hopes it can get a tank/vulture push going before toss develops arbitrers/carriers. Here after dark archons get their energy and get close to the neutrals terran is dead for sure. Also, this map is tight but there are lateral corridors from which toss can flank a terran army.
However, I am willing to make changes. I can, for example make the central part of the map unbuildable (crevices) so a would be Terran player cannot make turrets. Would that apease my critics?
modified by Lancet | | flothefreak | | | | actually your biggest problem is that there is no reason or need for a 1race-only-map :9 | | Excalibur | | | | By burn the bridges i meant defeat the purpose of going there, aka the neutrals are dead. | | Lancet | | | | flothefreak, LOL! you know when you ask one of those mountain climbers why they risk their lives climbing a mountain and they reply: "because it's there" and you walk away saying "what kind of an idiot is he"? Well if you ask me why did I make a 1 race only map (so far two of them) I simply reply "because it's not there"! See, before I did it it had not been done (to my knowledge). Mind you, you still walk away saying "what kind of an idiot is he" although hopefully in this particular case my life is not on the line! | | Excalibur | | | | Well Lancet, by your definition, this should be in experimental. | | Lancet | | | | OK, point well taken, in my next edit of the map I will label this one and "Conflict Resolution" for that matter "experimental". Thanks. | | flothefreak | | | i dont blame you for making maps with this attempt of concept. but still, it is imo a fact that there wont be any use of it - starcraft is just not built or has not developed in a way which allows one-race-maps for competition. in MY opinion, you'd be best off to see it as a study of seeing how you can influence mirror matches with the map. just make testgames to learn how certain mechanics strenghthen or weaken the different tactics there, and how you can change the gameplay. but again, IMO you should stick to that and dont set your goal to making those 3 maps a serious candidate for the public gaming community, because i dont think there's more potential in it as for a few fungames. i dont want to discourage you, feel free to prove me wrong (which would be a good thing because you pushed the limits then). but at the current state, i'd say the only reason for making such maps is individual improvement of the own mapmaking skills and game mechanics than can be used in maps...
modified by flothefreak | | Lancet | | | I don't see why a sufficiently "avant garde" league cannot allow those players that will play a game employing the same race to have the option to use my maps or somebody elses one race maps. The one race maps would allow the use of abilities that are not normally used in gameplay in regular maps.
As to specifically why my maps, I was inspired by the map "Defection vBeta" by Novos. I said to myself how many times does a Zerg player really get to use infected Terrans in games (they are hard to use) or swarms placed in the thick of the action? How many times does a Protoss player play a game with an emphasis on using mind controlled units? How many times does Terran get to use pre-existing add-ons? I saw that there was a need for these maps to showcase underused capacities in the races. | | Lancet | | | Added some final decor.
Comment: first map of this trilogy: "Conflict Resolution" (Map ID 2164) and last map of this trilogy (High Noon on Korhal" (Map ID 2192). This one is, of course, the second. |
| 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
|  |
