new account
list users
Map DB
Map Access
New map
Edit map

Back to "final" maps.   Show all maps.
Last update for (4)Plating 1.2 : 2008, 10, 28 19:34
mapIDMapname (comments)map sizeAuthorRatingTypeplay type
3300 (4)Plating 1.2 128*128MorroW0.2finalground

The map has been rated 50 times and got a total of 12 points


You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
Comments:   GMCS (0 elements)

just finnished, forgot the colonies, map settings and that stuff to make map playable :P
just wanted to show map in (4)
Nats look too open, can anything besides tanks use the nat cliffs? S/N 3rd gas (the highground one) base's one ramp sticks into a wall, there's a lot less room in front of it than the other ramps, for example the ramp on the left of the N 3rd gas expo runs right into red's main edge while the bottom ramp of W 3rd gas expo aims along the path.
You could make a better center in another tileset.
Maybe add some more spell use?
Red's main seems small in the picture to me oO

I'm concerned that it's too hard for protoss to attack terran until he's on the highground middle, but once he gets to the highground it seems hard for terran to push out, even if it's buildable, just because it's so open and because of the multiple paths p can use to flank or counter him with.
The distances between ramps and chokes and expos seem too short, things look jumbled together. I guess that's what was good about this map being (3)before, more room between things.
I think it might be fine though, but perhaps shrink the middle a little bit to give more room to the sides? Though that might the middle unused since everyone could push down the sides if they were wider, but the middle'd still be used for flanks and counters I spose, I dunno. I mean though, look at the min onlys, they look pretty crowded to me, they'll get in the way of the path a little bit if you take them.
The middle is just so big, but almost all of the action is on the sides. The middle expos aren't worth much. If you added more money to them though they'd be too close to the other expos. The middle tries to pretend the map's focus is on the center, but actually the map's focus is on the sides. Increasing the distances between expos somehow would help. Reminds me of Tau Cross a little bit. I also don't like the pathing. It feels unnatural. You move out of your nat, and then directly to one side is the min only, and directly to the other is a gas expo, there's no real flow. There aren't really any clever paths either. There are alternate routes, but they aren't very important since the middle is so spacious.

I know that the "point" of the map is to have a standard/basic concept and spice it up with spells, but I feel that the map is almost too simple, and that the few more exciting aspects of it, like the nat cliff and the fact that the highground 3rd gas expo is so close to your opponent like in Dread Core, are drowned out by other aspects of the map. Like, that the cliff barely oversees the expo, that everything in general is really close, except the middle which is too wide; the fact that the alternate paths mean less since the middle is so open and useless, which then further makes the dwebs less meaningful as well.

Another tileset will also allow you to use better ramps =/ Desert, Twilight, or Jungle would all work better, you'd have more options for terrain in the middle, and could use ruins/sand dune/crushed rock side ramps instead of these funny looking things.

Hmm the more I look at the picture the more I like the min onlys. They are a bit tight, but that's easily fixable by shrinking the middle. I dunno, I just like how they face straight down the path, looking at the other min only. Feels like a race-track or something, a circular road. But then, the side gas expos are kind of just thrown in there, where they don't belong, just because the map needs a 3rd gas expo. Obviously the 3rd gas expo is good, but its placement doesn't seem to flow right conceptually, I dunno. I think part of the problem is that the map's concept is almost in having no concept. I think you need to work more on the concept and emphasize it more or something. It reminds me of my map (2)Twisted Passion, where I made a somewhat interesting concept with the dwebs, but then didn't know how to finish the map and just threw down expos because the map needed them.

I really like aspects of the map, the funny gas expos in the middle, the normal third gas expo except that it has 2 ramps instead of one, the little road that goes around the middle where the min onlys look at eachother, and the nat cliffs with neutral creep colonies.
Actually I think I was wrong earlier, it's not that the map has no concept, it's more like that the map has too many features and concepts, and that they just don't all fit. As the map is now, it will play alright. I think it'll play a little turtley because the expos are so close to eachother, but otherwise it should play ok, standardly though. Which can be seen as good I guess because it's not radical, but the map's concepts I think drown eachother out so that all of the neat concepts in the end have almost no effect on gameplay, just in very rare or ineffectual scenarios.

The map's execution is of course much better than in the (3)version, but it conceptually imo betrays itself, and I'm just a little disapointed with that. I think the map will play alright, but just like any other map =/

I'm sorry to make all these complaints after telling you to remake the map in (4). I didn't pay enough attention to the (3)version I think. Not only that but, I don't have any real solutions to most of my complaints either, and I always try and give suggestions/solutions.

Oh and, I also could be wrong about the map, and maybe it stands out conceptually more than I'm giving it credit for. I might just be so critical because I liked the concepts of the (3)version and hoped/expected that the map would be amazing with the remake to (4), but obviously that's naive of me.
It's funny though, when I look at this map I almost think it would be better as a (3)map simply because a (3)map would have more room for the concepts, but the execution to do it properly would be very very hard.
Well I dunno. I'm looking at the (3)pic, and I think it'd be hard to pull off at all, since you inherently lose a lot of map space when you positionally balance (3)maps. I don't know. This is hard. You did a very good job given how hard it is, the more I think about it. I guess at this point the best suggestion I can make is to try and recycle some of the concepts for another map, that this particular blend/mix/stew of concepts just is too murky, too rich, too jumbled. I don't know. Maybe Testbug understands how to perfect the concept, because I don't, this is hard lol.

Hmm think about Othello. Othello has a similar expo design in a different layout. Othello's expo layout has very good distancing, on top of its expos all being harassable. But, the expos have to be so harassable, because the map is so relatively tight. Why is Othello tight? Because of the distance it gives its expo layout. The harassable expos counters the tightness. The tightness results from giving the expo layout good distancing. The good distances make the map very comfortable over-all. But, the nats and mains are kind of awkward and funny shaped in Othello, another side effect of the expo layout, and balancing it out with harassable expos, which takes up even more space. In the end it works, the mains aren't too awkward, the nat is funny shaped, but works, though they have to have the neutral for pvz, and sometimes your units will run into your miners anyway, and you have to rally to your 3rd base, but that's ok since it's so close.
Now look at this map. It tries to add another expo which Othello doesn't have. Also, this map tries to have a much larger middle, which complements the 4th gas expo. However the end result of this is that the expos have shorter than normal distances between them, which encourages turtley play, and then you have a very open middle, which only further encourages turtley play. Look at Python. Python is not turtley despite having such a wide middle, because the expos are so far apart. This makes them harder to hold in one place, already encouraging players to move out and about more even if the middle is so vulnerable, but then the expos are also much easier to harass because of the long distances, so both the mobile and non-mobile race can take advantage of aspects of the map, just like in Othello. That's not to say that you can't in this map, but I feel this map lacks the perfect balance of concepts that Othello and Python do. Close expos + large middle + short expo distances (different from close expos, tau has close expos but long distances between expos) + a general lack of harassability. Only the nat is easily harassable really, but the cliff appears to over-compensate for turret space and seems to me to be too far for most units besides tanks to be of any use. All of these things point towards t>p, p>z. tvz should be good though. The tight side paths help lurkers and defilers, encouraging the use of the middle, where zerg is also stronger. Then zerg has nice 3rd gas expos. But, terran also gets a nice 3rd base, but the 2 ramps help zerg harass terran's 3rd gas. The gas expo in the middle is more useful for t than to z imo, though I could be wrong. There is a lot available here for zvt, I think zvt is very good on the map, but that tvp while it won't be bad, will be for one boring and not exciting, and probably imbalanced. pvz... p has a clear advantage from the expo layout, but there's still a lot of options open to zerg. Thus, gameplay should be ok for zvp, but I think the expo layout strongly supports protoss in this mu, so in the end I think the map is p>z, since the middle isn't terribly useful except in cross positions. Lurker use will help balance this of course, but then it could be boring like split map zvp on bluestorm where it's just pushing back and forth with lurker lines. Note: this map is less flankable than bluestorm. The middle is very open yes, but its alternate routes are tighter. It's less linear though, which helps.

So in conclusion, I like the map, but I think it's concpetually impossible to pull off. Any "solutions" I could make would essentially involve making a new map.

I guess to make this work optimally without killing anything would involve restructuring the main and nat similarly to Othello, making things more harassable (from like cliffs, or vulnerably by being open), and completely redoing the middle, probably relocating all expos to somehow make pathing more appropriate, as well as better distributing the map's space. The mains would have to be moved and reshaped, the nats would have to be moved and reshaped, the gas expos would have to be moved and reshaped, the min onlys might be ok though, but you'd have to relocate them atleast to correspond with the new main/nat shape/position. This kind of rotational symmetry will not work, the nat pathing this form of rotational symmetry (with the main/nat positioning) really messes up the map. Consider how Othello is shaped/positioned, with how its directions are angled. It's not up/down or left/right, it's diagnal, which is really hard to pull off properly. One of trcc's maps has a layout which I'm kind of reminded of for some reason. I'll find it in a bit. If you look again at Othello though, Othello does have some extra space in the very center which they filled in for the pathing to work out better, and to tighten things a bit more to keep with the concept and to help balance. This is potentially good news for you since it possibly means there is extra space which you could use for your 4th gas expo. I don't know for sure though. The biggest problem with all of this though is that I have absolutely no clue where you'd place all of this stuff. If you're interested in pursuing this at all, you might have to do a lot of drawing on paper until you can find locations/shapes/positions/directions/pathing which works properly. It of course might not exist either.

When I think about all of this, I am a little reminded of Wuthering Heights, Othello, Byzantium, and Return of the King. None of these maps perfectly match up with the concept you want though. They all lack placement for that 4th gas expo. Consider though how they create the proper distances between expos, with non-standard main/nat placement/orientation, and how twisted they are, and how that leaves enough room for movement, flanking, and general combat. Your center is a lot more linear than theirs is, that's the biggest difference I notice.

Sorry for rant, I just wrote down absolutely everything that popped into my head.
oh comon

well it is morning i got my morning coat and my tea lets read this lol,
i understood everything

i didnt agree with the middle expo beeing better for terran than zerg, i think its better for zerg :P

ok i read everything. so this goes for the (4) ver and not the (3) ver? or it goes to both the maps? please answer clear.

i could make another version if u want (4)plating 2.0 without removing this one so u could reflect on both. in the 2.0 ver i would shrik the middle from every path, ofcourse leading to smaller middle, another dweb in every path and bigger sides.

about the cliff at the natural, i didndt want mutalisk harass to go imbalanced so i left it really safe. if u accept to move it closer in 2.0 i can do that ofc.

reds startlocation is actually on correct place as i forgot to move purples main.

blue and teal can construct 2 factories in front of their main meanwhile red 3. since the factory is 4x3 and the scanner and machine shop angles horizontal. u can check these presize shapings in othello and python.

i hope you understand why i chose to creat my own funny looking ramps instead of using already exsiting ones. i needed them in another angle for positional balancing. if i used regular ramps the tiles wouldnt go together very well and look like crap ^^

another way to balance pvz tvp is if i removed 1 mineral from third gas and adding 1 mineral to min-only.
Nightmarjoo you going too write a book on brood war maps or something? because i think you already started, gotta get my glasses to read what you wrote.
its like fapping for him
Morrow everything I said here applies specifically to this version. Some of it also applies to the (3)version, but I wasn't addressing it. I can comment the (3)version too if you want, but it would mostly sound similar to what I said here I think.

For your ramps, in another tileset you could make better looking ramps which worked just as well. It doesn't really matter though lol.

Yeah I know why you placed the cliff that far, but I think it's too far. I could be wrong btw, since I didn't test anything. In Spinel Valley III the cliff oversees the nat really closely, but there's also room on both sides of the geyser for turrets still, as well as behind the minerals if necessary. Maybe try something like that?

Another version would be ok imo, or you could just upload the pic to photobucket or something and post the old pic in this thread and just edit this thread for the new version.

I didn't think hard about the middle expo, so I definitely could be wrong about it.

For your new version, were you planning on moving things around at all, or just shrinking the middle? I think that even if it does help, doing so won't fix all problems, just address one issue, but the main underlying problem would probably remain. I spose though we won't know for sure til you make the new version.

Because of how close/tight the min only is, I don't think it makes a difference to move a block there from the gas expo, since terran can so easily grab it. Maybe move the min only to be against the middle cliff instead? That way it'll be farther and more vulnerable.
update (1.1)
- middle smaller
- fixed some of the ove spots
- larger nat cliffs also closer to the expo
- added creep colonies to cliffs
- much of middle unbuildable
- 12,3,9,6 middle ramps alittle wider
- added more dwebs
- start locations remade
- better mineral formations
nightmarjooo making middle smaller was very good idea i apprieciate :)
It looks a little better, but I don't like how there really isn't any advantage to taking the min only at all. In fact, not only does it lack gas, is about the same distance from the nat, and lacks the altitude advantage and ramp choke for defense, it actually has fewer minerals lol. Also, I don't think that just adding minerals to it is a good idea, as that will only make the map more turtley, but I feel something needs changed about the min only and/or gas expo to even things out between them and add strategical value to each expansion, not just economic value.
Why there are 2 normal ramps to middle?
tbh i dont know, i agree all should be fucked up since thats kind of the theme with this map ^^
well, final version done now. fixed decoration walling need 2 supply 1 rax now since its kinda imba when t wall with 1 rax.

dont think this concept is gonna get any more balanced at such map
shuuu remove the d-webs and map is finished :D

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
random map
  (4)Diamond Dust
Newest updates:
  (4)Nocturne of Sh..
  (2)Lobotomy 2.82
  (3)Ra 0.66
  (2v6)Rich vs Lean
  (4)Maw of the Dee..
  • month 6:
      (2)Butter 2.0b
  • MOTW
  • week 2021.01:
      (3) Lambda 1.0
  • Main Forum
  • New B..(Kroznade)
  • Magna..(addressee)
  • No Fo..(Pension)
  • Share..(Shade)R)
  • Feedback
  • This s..(triller1)
  • Rotati..(triller1)
  • Off Topic
  • scm dr..(addressee)
  • Real L..(Pension)
  • Vetera..(ProTosS4Ev)
  • Starcraft 2
  • announ..(triller1)
  • STARCR..(triller1)
  • Search Forum
  • x  
  • How to make larvae spawn at the bottom right corner  
  • Worker pathing guide - How to debug and balance resour
  • Competition:
  • Innovative Naturals Competition  
  • Tourney Map Pack Aspirant Suggestions  
  • Maps That Need A Remake  
  • Think Quick Map Contest ($100 prize)