| PsychoTemplar | | |
Attempt #2 at utilizing null terrain.
Stack of eight 500 value patches (must be stacked, because if you don't minerals act weird and mining is suuper slow.
modified by PsychoTemplar |
| BestTarsier | | |
Ugh, that black terrain is mega-ugly >_<
who would want to play on that! |
| tktkvroom | | |
| ... |
| ProTosS4EveR | | |
| Space tileset is the choosen one. |
| Lancet | | |
I did some research with a map I am making and 12 SCVs mining for 4 min on 4 mineral clumps 1,500 each in "null" vs "space platform" results in a 250 mineral difference in favor of platform. So you are right, but the problem I have with the stacking of minerals so is that you can loose track of how many workers you have produced. With the minerals in the normal position at least you can get a "birds-eye" view of how many workers you have.
How do you propose to play maps where the starting location (SL) is surrounded by a large amount of null tile as in yours? The SL are obviously very vulnerable to air units. Should players try to go air as soon as possible?
Have you had any problems with the null tile playing zerg? See my "Null Tile Problem" message in the Main Forum. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
I figure minerals are pretty much mined out by the time anyone gets a wraith or two out, or their 7-9 Muta. I was looking at Mazicolozist's update, and apparently he has a buildable null tile, so maybe I'll put that where a Terran would want to build his Comstat.
No, I haven't had any problems with Zerg on either of my maps.
I think what needs to be understood about maps with null tiles, that a lot of people don't seem to get yet, is that they allow you to choose what base you want (your natural will be a lot more like your mainbase when you've mined out your actual main base) which allows for many, many more strategies than on a map where you're stuck with what's given to you. On this map for example, you can choose you build your main base on that semi-island blocked by DTs, or on the mainland which might allow you a greater degree of control in the middle stages of the game.
But I mean, I make maps I know I'd like to play, and unfortunately I often disagree with other people. Especially BestTarsier, as if anyone plays StarCraft for it's aesthetic beauty; for crying out loud I thought the marines gun picture was a pencil for years, and the stim pac a sword, before I really looked at it to find that they sort of looked like a gattling gun and needle. StarCraft is about gameplay and always will be. It's the most complex game ever made, and probably will remain so because games these days are made to be more and more user friendly. Whether one person thinks null tiles are ugly (honestly, they look fine ;P), or the entire Ashworld tileset (a lot of people have decided that's ugly too), doesn't mean shit to anyone who actually still plays this game.
TBH though, I haven't tested this map beyond myself with a computer to check the DT walls and mining and stuff. I'd really like someone to play with on it. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
| Hmm, well you could be able to build a comstat, except that the CC is so close to the minerals XD |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
What I want to know, is what about the gameplay is more fun to play on with the map having null terrain and stacked minerals instead of a normal main and minerals?
This map isn't bad, but I don't see why you use null terrain, just kind of using it to be using it. And I got made fun of for using swarms/dwebs for using them just to add to the gameplay, so I don't see how this is any different. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
If I used dirt instead of Null terrain on this map, it would not be the same. I thought this was self evident, but apparently not.
When you used DSes and DWebs, you spinkled them randomly with no particular intention. If you read my post, you'll see that my intention is very clear, and has nothing to do with just having it for the sake of having it, at least not anymore than one adds dirt to their map for players to build on, or rocky ground that players can't build on. This map would be complete crap without the null terrain, so I don't see where you're coming from.
"What I want to know, is what about the gameplay is more fun to play on with the map having null terrain and stacked minerals instead of a normal main and minerals?"
Different and new things are always fun. It's why anyone first started playing StarCraft. It's why people like to experiment with other races when they've played one awhile. I don't know how to quantify fun exactly, so that's the best answer I can give you ;P |
| Lancet | | |
| This post is not displayed due to its content |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| "When you used DSes and DWebs, you spinkled them randomly with no particular intention" if you say so. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
| I do say so, lol. having a DS in the corner of someone's base makes no sense at all, and just tiling them like a checkerboard around the map shows a lack of focus and concept. |
| Lancet | | |
| The DS/dweb in the corner concept has been explained many times and the checkerboard idea was conceived before starting the map and implemented accordingly. You may not like them, you may disagree with them (like people may not like or disagree with you using null tiles) but you can't argue it's lack of focus or concept. |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| Uh oh, templar didn't do it so obivously it's a lack of focus or concept. Templar is always right. Why do we noobs even comment his obviously perfect maps? |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
I think I could. But this isn't about Nightmarjoo's map, so if you or him really care enough about it to discuss it, start a topic in the forum and I'll be happy to share my views ;P
Frankly I don't think my null-tile maps need anymore attention. People have obviously already made up their minds about them, and no one but myself is going to bother to test them ever. I'm really not a fan of theorycraft once a map has been made. At that point it should just be played, and whatever people think they can abuse about the map, the should feel free to do so.
I think I need a hiatus from map making for a bit. I'll check to see if you want to discuss Nightmar's maps (I'm almost certain neither of you care enough), but if not I'll stay away from posting for a bit too. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
"Templar is always right."
I want to address this too, because I get it a lot from people over the internet (maybe they don't understand my tone, maybe I'm kinder offline). It's not that I think I can't be wrong. It's not that I think I'm smarter than everyone else. I just like to discuss things, and usually my endurance for a discussion is greater than anyone elses, so it seems like I just want to be right no matter what. In truth, I just like to 'argue' (discuss is a better word), because you learn a lot throughout a discussion. And I like to learn. It pushes one to think more deeply about his own opinions, and gives one better reason to have said opinions, and with a willing participant, you get another point of view as well that you can consider after the discussion to see if you ought to change you view too. |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| No, I try and discuss and you just say I'm wrong. You argue like a 5 year old who is certain they're right. That's why I stopped commenting your maps. Look what happened when I did comment, you just brushed aside what I said, I dunno why you even bothered responding. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
Actually, you didn't comment on my map, you whined that it was unfair your map made fun of while mine wasn't (even though I don't recall I was one of the ones making fun of your map, or even commenting on it).
And now you're whining that when I defend my views, it's suddenly acting like a 5 year old who thinks he's always right. So fuck you if you don't listen to my side of the argument. You can just rub yourself off while you enjoy my hiatus :) |
| uC.MorroW | | |
i think this map is really cool , never seen anything like it^^
tho nothing i would call balanced :D
i think a map like this null main style would be good in a 2v2 map |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
Uploaded replays and fixed observer version (I had a sprite and a neutral on top of each other because in melee mode it disappears, but it doesn't in UMS; that might be interesting for anyone who wants a concept with stacked buildings :P).
PS: SuperiorWolf said the map was really fun, so :P |
| Rye | | |
Stats on those neutral DT's? (HP)
Maybe connect the smaller no-resource islands with the mainland, as well as with the min-onlies? It's already in tank range, might as well open 'er up for movement.
modified by Rye |
| Paladin-EX | | |
If the comsat issue gets fixed (if it hasn't been already, I dunno if the pic is updated), then it seems like this would actually be a fun and original map. Really, there's nothing I can complain about.
Though for the love of God, non-zerg players, kill that creep colony before you get sunk rushed. :D |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
| I don't really see not have a scan from your main CC is a real imbalance. You can have two more bases quick enough if you wanted to play it that way, so you're not going to be short of CCs to add scanners to. |
| Raelcun | | |
| what about the fact that after trying to play on this map workers dont path right through the null tile even with a rally point, they refuse to build on the gas half the time requiring spending a good 10-15 seconds babysitting and spamming them to build on the gas for them to do it. The only race that can actually build on the tile is zerg meaning they're free to get up to mutas ignoring zerglings and going on harass raids no risk. They're also the ones who can take the expansions the easiest, the null tile is buildable in that it says you can build on it but anything besides zerg refuses to build there saying you cannot build there |
| Lancet | | |
You can build hatcheries in the nul tiles, nothing else, and the amount of creep they generate is not a lot (creep colonies don't add a lot of new creep).
Having said that, from watching the replays in this particular map zerg does seem quite strong.
The null tiles require their own game playing skills, yes you have to make sure units excecute their commands and you have to be carefull about whether rally points will work. In exchange for this anoyance the things null tiles allow you to do IMO compensate for this.
Only 3 mappers to my knowledge have experimented with null tiles here. Templar with this map and the map "Out of the Void", Mapghost with his map "Mazicolozist" (who introduced the null tiles idea here) and me with the maps "Waters of Exgelia" and "Sumeria V".
modified by Lancet |
| Raelcun | | |
| you can actually seem to place creep colonies outside of the creep in some instances but they dont add any additional creep meaning since the null area is only vulnerable to air attacks you can set up spore colonies I find this particular part strange I havent been able to try out dropping units on null tiles does it let you do that or is the only way to get ground units tehre to build them there? |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
"what about the fact that after trying to play on this map workers dont path right through the null tile even with a rally point, they refuse to build on the gas half the time requiring spending a good 10-15 seconds babysitting and spamming them to build on the gas for them to do it. The only race that can actually build on the tile is zerg meaning they're free to get up to mutas ignoring zerglings and going on harass raids no risk. They're also the ones who can take the expansions the easiest, the null tile is buildable in that it says you can build on it but anything besides zerg refuses to build there saying you cannot build there"
Let me just call you an idiot, and leave it at that. |
| PsychoTemplar | | |
| *Added information about null terrain to briefing in Obs version for ease of use with players new to the terrain. |
| Lancet | | |
| Shit templar! Why you have to insult the guy? This are the things I don't get about you. If he is wrong just explain to him why or let someone else do it. Null terrain can be disconcerting for players that try to play it like if it were regular terrain, cut the man some slack. |
| Testbug | | |
| no Raelcun, you DO can drop your units in the null terrain |
| Lancet | | |
Yeah, you can drop units but it may prove difficult moving units around. I have found that sometimes null tiles have some hidden topography, if you click on the wrong place units may go in the opposite direction and exit the tiles.
I will try a map with null tiles again soon just because of how great it looks and all the new things you can do with them but it can be a headache to work with the tiles and sometimes when you place things in the wrong sections weird things happen check my post:
http://www.panschk.de/mappage/forum/showthread?subforum=main&threadid=883 |
| Raelcun | | |
Okay so you think I'm an idiot why, zerg are the only race that can build on the null tile this has been confirmed by others, they're also the race least affected by having to hatch early. Add to that the fact that even their pool will be delayed by the need for an additional hatch to be able to build it theres a big section of creep for them to defend with but I still see a bunker rush as unstoppable on this map vs a zerg whats he going to do? Move his workers off the null tile so that they can't go back and if he does fight it off hes not mining until the hatch finishes. It's an intereseting idea I never said it was a bad idea, I kind of like the map I just think it has some serious balance issues because of the start base being null.
I realize theres a need to split the two exits from the null tile but I think going off onto the water is somewhat not working because a worker will sometimes path off the null over onto the water and can get stuck which takes quite a lot of clicking to dislodge him from just moving back and forth over the water, what if you just placed an impassable doodad there instead that way the worker doesnt get stuck because even if it goes the wrong way you can tell them to collect through the dt wall. When the worker gets stuck I only seem to be able to unstick them in one direction anyway.
modified by Raelcun |
| Lancet | | |
Raelcun I'm confused, I thought you were arguing that zerg had an advantage here. That was my perception from the replays (did you see them?). In this map zerg will obviously FE as fast as possible and set up sunkens.
I will restate what I said above, do not give workers or other units complex commands while on the null tiles. Get them off the null tiles and then do that. Zerg is better off not bulding on the null tiles. |
| Raelcun | | |
| the most complex command I've given a worker off the null was a move command and still they someimtes pathed over the water as for the zerg it's hard to explain, extremely early if they play safe they're untouchable or if they are looking more towards the late game and expo early then they're vulnerable because their pool is delayed no matter what they do. So basically you're putting players into a position where they either have to do damage early to keep the game going if they play safe or they have to be extremely vulnerable if they're looking for a midgame win. The dts wont stop a bunker from a smart terran they will just make a few marines and scvs and use the barracks landing push to force a few through the wall and make an opening. |
| LasTCursE | | |
| how you put the fucking minerals there |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| Scmdraft, check unit stacking and uncheck require mineral distance. |
(2)Chaos Darkness
-
Chef vs 
MuShuPork(1on1, 1.15)
PsychoTemplar vs 
SuperiorWolf(1on1, 1.15)
