| Starparty | | |
| high bridges? o_O |
| Nureru | | |
I'd been debating making a map with high bridges for a while now, but I'm glad I didn't because this is way better than anything I would have come up with.
Seriously, this looks like a lot of fun. I'll let someone better comment on any positional imbalances so I don't make a fool of myself, but good job.
P.S. How the hell do you people make 3 player maps so well >.< |
| Alter.Ego | | |
only the north south one is not good, but I don't think theres anything to be done for that :)
Good work, really good, I guess the tiles are high ruins? |
| ScoutWBF | | |
| 2Gas in main or this map is pretty much a zerg graveyard. |
| Crackling | | |
no nat?
imba |
| spinesheath | | |
High bridges AGAIN?
Very blocky, SP. You should improve this. Not only the bridges, but also the water cliffs at some places as well as the cliff-raised jungle transition. There is good blend for this. |
| Testbug | | |
yeah, i have seen your bridge in the map (2)Interception
your 1st 3 players map? (i remember "(3)open sea" but you may know... errr xD)
where is the natural expo? this looks great, is it really imba? will 2gass mains solve the problem? will starparty totally come back?
...only at broodwarmaps.net!!
modified by Testbug |
| Starparty | | |
| i actually created it to play 2v1 with my noob friends :P |
| Crackling | | |
HAHAHA I CAUGHT U ;D ;D ;D
remove bridges and move expos like the arrows are showing...
u got endless fields without highground center :p
modified by Crackling |
| Testbug | | |
hehe with the high ground exos facing each other's ramp :D
oh this has the sarparty style, looks old school |
| Excalibur | | |
| If i claimed to know what to say id be lying. O.O |
| l[StaR]Blade | | |
| looks awesome |
| Moebius | | |
| Wow...100x better than my 3 player map. |
| EasYLosS | | |
This map cures cancer.
I wish the naturals were closer to the ramp though since I play zerg. This is a really inspiring map.
Good job. |
| Starparty | | |
| the testbug map got me into it. Originally its a bit of a mix between endless fields and TheWave (as i wanted it to be) |
| Lancet | | |
| Those bridges are amazing congratulations! However, if zerg plans to go for the mineral-nat, he's dead. On the other hand if he intends to go for the gas nat he will have to defend two open places at once, which is something that zerg doesn't do well and the wide ramp to the gas-nat is a killer. I would tell you to block the main entrance and leave the bridge to the gas-nat open but that may create pathing problems. One possibility that may balance this is to place a neutral creep colony close to the main's entrance and perhaps the gas-nat's entrance. It would have to be played. The bridges and the map are beautiful but you have to try to fix this zerg problem. |
| Starparty | | |
| actually i wanted to block the wide nat ramps with buildings, but honestly, i forgot how to do that :P |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
High bridges are certainly nothing new, dunno what you guys are cheering for.
I kinda doubt pathing is good =/
Not enough room in mains for buildings.
How many minerals are the min blocks.
zvt nightmare, zvp looks pretty bad too. tvp looks hard, seems like a p map.
I guess neat concept, but balance-wise looks pretty bad. One thing you could do to give it better gameplay is to put the min wall on the expo's ramp, but that'll give it more macro oriented gameplay, and the map seems to want a less macro oriented gameplay. |
| Moebius | | |
| Red's mineral only expo is easier to take than the other's. |
| Starparty | | |
| @moeb, i have no intention of altering minor variety isues, sorry. |
| uC.MorroW | | |
| i gave it 10 rating, anyway i think those sonna bitch trees in middle would ruin my sweet micro time :), great map |
| flothefreak | | |
nah distance to expos IS a pos. imba, not a pos. variety. but i agree it is something minor which doesnt need to be perfect; other than choke wideness at mains or something.
pos. variety (imo) would be in Gaia where you either have normal gameplay, or enhanced drop/harass style. |
| Moebius | | |
SP, I'm not talking about the mineral variety, I'm talking about the expo placement. Red's mineral only is much easier to claim/defend than the others.
While you're at it though, you can fix the tankable low ground near those bridged expos. |
| Starparty | | |
| it is intended... |
| Moebius | | |
| Positional imbalance is intended? What kind of mapper are you? |
| DeSade | | |
Map is really exceptional and well made.
But lol you will see a map of me soon which inheritates kind of this concept but brings it to full glory. My respect to Starparty ;). |
| Starparty | | |
moebius, take a close look and see that all positions have tank spots. But i suppose you noticed that.
"what kind of mapper are you?"
God i almost feel the urge to list accomplishments, but i see no point in it. As i mentioned before, If you want a boring standard crap map with the same stupid BO eeeeevery single time, go play arena. If you dont, and want to be able to pull of some different strategies and tactics, try this.
I know that the mineral wall must change i some way, but i havent decided how yet. I might even remove a few expos, i dont want it to be too macro oriented. That kinda was the point from the start.
Edit: To make clear, the tank spots are intended. The red min only is just a unfortunate coincindece, but as i said, it might just dissapear anyway.
modified by Starparty |
| lnept | | |
| this doesnt look like a zerg graveyard, looks pretty fun to me. who wants to get slayed by my zerg after I havent played for 3 months on this map, step up |
| Moebius | | |
What's s fucking hard about fixing the damn mineral only expo, SP?
Positional imba is NOT an encouragement of strategy, mmk? Seeing someone like you who has a "list of accomplishments" unwilling to fix something so simple as this is pathetic.
I'm not asking you to anything remotely hard, just trying to help you improve the map. Sheez. |
| Starparty | | |
My goal at the minute is not to create something that is perfect enough for two equal professional gamers to play on. There are loads of other maps that fill that function. This map is intended to give a variety for the normal gamer to simply have fun playing on. If everything is exactly mirrored, the features of the map is very limited. Ill just make a classical example - The mineral onlies on LT and the expansions in general were all of different difficulty to keep and of different distance from the main. it usually wasnt reason enough to blame the map for a loss you know.
Edit: Even on stupid pos matchups, like 3t 12p LT, special strategies evolved to tackle the problem. Just because the different positions have different prerequisities doesnt always mean it is plain imbalanced.
Perfect maps are boring, just face it. The trick is to make it different without making it stupidly different, like adding 5 gas nodes extra to one player.
modified by Starparty |
| Moebius | | |
| LT is only played because we felt bad for how pathetic Blizz is at mapping. |
| starparty | | |
| right... |
| Alumni | | |
let's bring back that saying ummm "positional variety"
if everyone wanted to make a map intended for competitive play with the most balance, we'd only have so many different ways to make it before everything starts playing similarly the same all with straight forward gameplay throughout. Only it would look different.
over the period of time i've been on this site, there's been a noticeably good chunk of people here who have never really been open to fresh ideas or concepts (i don't mean custom terrain/ramps) that are out of the ordinary. It's always the same old gas issue, middle being too tight (battlefield doesn't have to necessarily be always in the middle of a map), and positional imbalance just because it's a 3 player map.
ever try to implement something new that may alter gameplay to make things interesting? BOOM!!!!! SHUT DOWN MOFO! GG NO RE.
personally i like this map because it looks nice, fun to play on, and is playable. starparty accomplished his goal.
modified by Alumni |
| flothefreak | | |
i dont mind pos. variety, but LT is a very bad example for this. spawning on wrong positions (12-3 ZvT or PvT) gave you a SIGNIFICANT imbalance. as zerg, you needed to 3hatch against a so fast rush due to the distance, and as p you got shot on half of your way out of the nat, and you couldnt use your natural at all. so basically, it was luck if you spawned on a balanced or an imbalanced map.
pos. variety is okay, though, as long as it doesnt affect a real striking imbalance. |
| ONYX | | |
| woowang k good k |
| Starparty | | |
| People seldom complained on the differences on LT though, and often new types of game style countered these positional flaws. Atleast i knew that being on different pos MU's in LT made me think of different strategies to use, not how much easier i was gonna win because the map was imbalanced. |
| flothefreak | | |
as i remember it, there were always complaints...not "LT is imba" but "12-3 ZvT sucks so hard"
and i dont think it is new playingstyle which countered it, it was more that you were FORCED to go a certain BO. (like 3htach on given ZvT positions).
i also did fast 2gaterangegoon everytime i spawned pvT 12-3 because i knew that a) the distance is close so rush is effective and b) i wont be able to take my nat if i dont kill him quickly or at least do heavy damage. |
| Starparty | | |
| and when you spawned 12-6 you didnt = map diversity :P |
| Starparty | | |
| tbh im going to create another map whit completelly different set ups per base. It might prove to work. |
| Starparty | | |
| a bit like all these combo maps with 4 maps in one :7 |
| Excalibur | | |
| Image is broke. |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| Don't worry, it wasn't that good to begin with. |
(3)Camel Blue.jpg)
