You can rate the map here. Chose a grade between 10 (best) and 0 (worst).
| ptar | | | | your're welcome! | | sWaGu | | | | haha | | testbug | | | too much wasted space
too short nat to nat distance
too large main to nat stance | | SiaBBo | | | | What a fucking problem is wasted space. -_- | | Testbug | | | lol i don0t mean "wasted space fucks gameplay"
i mean, if the map were pushed to the sides, the middle would be larger, he may be able to add some more expos, cliffs, islands, etc somewhere | | Manhattan | | | There's not wasted space. I don't feel that islands would enhance gameplay on this map. Main to Nat distance is fine. Nat to Nat I see no problem with, but I haven't played it yet.
The "different" part of it is that the expo layout (while nothing "new") isn't something I've seen executed and presented as well as this map does.
"Wasted space" doesn't ruin gameplay. It gives you room to move your units. What a concept, huh?
What's special about this map? Not really anything, one might say, but they're wrong. It takes a simple concept, implements it well, and doesn't scream "HI I'M UNIQUE" with neutral buildings, or creep, or eggs, or dark swarms, or disruption webs, or whatever the hell else people try to use.
The thing is, the map looks and feels playable. Something that mappers seem to have forgotten about in this day and age.
However, I will say this: Judging by the beautiful execution and design, it seems as if the mapper was thinking about how to make their map special and then decided to not bother, instead making areas not on the mainland serve simply as eye-candy.
And I'm sure the mapper is capable of more than this, but it seems that he/she simply wanted to take a simple concept and do it well, since no one else seems like they have. | | ProTosS4EveR | | | "The "different" part of it is that the expo layout (while nothing "new") isn't something I've seen executed and presented as well as this map does."
take a look at moon tear, better execution. more expos for the same base layout
"Main to Nat distance is fine. Nat to Nat I see no problem with, but I haven't played it yet."
how do you know? you didn't test it
"The thing is, the map looks and feels playable. Something that mappers seem to have forgotten about in this day and age."
The thing is, actually mappers try to find new ways of playing because classic basic maps are played so much and ppl always want new things
I can make 10 basic balanced maps in 1 hour if i want, but none will play it because it`s too basic and linear. so i try some other features and try to implent them well (i said i try ;) ) | | Manhattan | | | "take a look at moon tear, better execution. more expos for the same base layout"
Moon tear is a 3 player map. There's more room for expansions in a 3 player map. Secondly, Testbug himself decided that he wanted to update moon tear. Moon Tear II does not have this expo layout at all. Moon Tear (the original) has a gas in the in-base expo, while this doesn't. There ya go, it's different.
"how do you know? you didn't test it"
You didn't either. As I said. It "looks" fine. I don't see how someone could just glance at it and say it's bad.
"The thing is, actually mappers try to find new ways of playing because classic basic maps are played so much and ppl always want new things
I can make 10 basic balanced maps in 1 hour if i want, but none will play it because it`s too basic and linear. so i try some other features and try to implent them well (i said i try ;) )"
And mappers tend to overdo it so it's terrible. Can you make 10 "basic" maps that implement a concept well? Can you make them as attractive as this? This is linear, yes, but that's not a bad thing. | | JungleTerrain | | | Manhattan, LOL! Seriously, stop making your opinions sound like facts. Don't let the "beauty" of the map's design fool you, I can make a pretty map, even with unwalkable tiles, heck, have you played "Strip Jessica Alba" before?
Main too nat distance is long, scv transfer one minute!
The only thing that bothers me about this map is that some person just snatched it off another site and posted it here. Pretty funny how the Author is "korean" lol
Imo, the author can do a better job, but it seems too plain. I wouldn't play this map if I had an option to not play it.
modified by JungleTerrain | | Manhattan | | | I just opened the map and moved my starting scvs to my nat.
It took 13 seconds. | | Failtastic | | | +1 clone map, as one might say. Funny name, har har.
Distance between main and nat isn't "unbearable" but it's certainly longer than most maps that are played currently, like Python.
It feels like there should be more expos.
Granted, it's hard to make a decent 4-player rotational have a new or interesting concept, it should at least have something than "expo in the base." | | testbug | | | main to nat is too long for zergs.
there are no safe overlord spots.
nat to nat is too close for zerg
2 gate zlot or simple marines, sunken colonies won't be ready.
because of that, a terran timed push is incredible strong vs protoss | | JungleTerrain | | | ROFL Manhattan, u took me seriously? LOL! 13 seconds!
modified by JungleTerrain | | ProTosS4EveR | | | "Moon tear is a 3 player map. There's more room for expansions in a 3 player map. Secondly, Testbug himself decided that he wanted to update moon tear. Moon Tear II does not have this expo layout at all. Moon Tear (the original) has a gas in the in-base expo, while this doesn't. There ya go, it's different."
mains in the corner = +1 expo (3rd gas) for each player, longer nat to nat distances, just doing this you erase some flaws of the map
"Secondly, Testbug himself decided that he wanted to update moon tear. "
Why are you talking about that?i speak of 1st version, you don't have enough good arguments so you speak about something that has any link?
"Can you make 10 "basic" maps that implement a concept well?"
I can
"Can you make them as attractive as this?"
I can, i have one of the best deco here
modified by ProTosS4EveR | | Target | | | "I can, i have one of the best deco here "
I understand that you're upset, and are looking for something to support your position, but that doesn't give you the right to put down everyone else in this community by claiming you have "one of the best deco here". | | ProTosS4EveR | | | | ask people and judge yourself, i have nothing more to say | | ptar | | | | lol i have one of the best deco xD | | Nightmarjoo | | | "There's not wasted space. I don't feel that islands would enhance gameplay on this map. Main to Nat distance is fine. Nat to Nat I see no problem with, but I haven't played it yet.
The "different" part of it is that the expo layout (while nothing "new") isn't something I've seen executed and presented as well as this map does.
"Wasted space" doesn't ruin gameplay. It gives you room to move your units. What a concept, huh?
What's special about this map? Not really anything, one might say, but they're wrong. It takes a simple concept, implements it well, and doesn't scream "HI I'M UNIQUE" with neutral buildings, or creep, or eggs, or dark swarms, or disruption webs, or whatever the hell else people try to use.
The thing is, the map looks and feels playable. Something that mappers seem to have forgotten about in this day and age
However, I will say this: Judging by the beautiful execution and design, it seems as if the mapper was thinking about how to make their map special and then decided to not bother, instead making areas not on the mainland serve simply as eye-candy.
And I'm sure the mapper is capable of more than this, but it seems that he/she simply wanted to take a simple concept and do it well, since no one else seems like they have."
I love posts like this. Why? Because it's wrong!
There is a LOT of wasted space. Space that isn't being used but which exists, is wasted. The mains are of a large size, as are the nats, so the wasted space isn't effecting them. What it is effecting, and be sure there always exists consequences for not best using the available space, is it's creating a relatively very small middle, very short nat2nat distances, and nearly linear pathing caused by the non-existance of multiple routes, or of a lot of space to run around in. These DO effect and in my opinion HURT gameplay. The side effects of this in actual balance, is that it's easy to push directly to your opponent and hard to stop a push coming directly at you. This immediately forces t>p t>z p>z, the classic imbalances caused by what's generally knowned as "tightness". The "tightness" here is a lack of room for mobility, caused by the poor use of the map's space. Guess what, the min only inside your main actually accentuates t>p t>z and p>z. The author must definitely be pushing for a certain imbalance.
What's special about this map? Nothing at all, bwm mappers would say, and they're right! It takes a simple concept, executes it poorly by wasting space, and does scream "HI, I'M ABSOLUTELY MEDIOCRE! THERE'S NO REASON TO EVER PLAY ME BECAUSE MY SIMPLE CONCEPT OF MAIN, NAT, MIN ONLY HAS BEEN DONE OVER 9000 TIMES, AND IN MAPS WHICH ARE MORE MOBILE AND LESS BORING/TURTLEY/MACROISH!", and doesn't even attempt to spice up gameplay with neutral buildings, creep, eggs, dark swarms, disruption webs, cliffable expos, or anything interesting which won't hurt gameplay.
The thing is, the map looks boring and feels playable but imbalanced. Something that mappers seem to have forgotten about in this day and age, instead creating INTERESTING or worse, BALANCED maps.
However, I will say this: Judging by the poor execution and the only detail of the map going into making a pretty picture, the mapper simply wanted to take a boring concept/map, do it mediocrely, and make a pretty picture, since only 340909345 others have done the same.
Seriously Manhattan, this concept alone has been done 430909 times, the only difference between this and other maps using the LT expo layout (minus the islands) is that this one has shorter distances and is tighter. The only thing good about its execution is that it's positionally balanced, but I didn't realize that was something to care about these days, as anyone and their mother can make a positionally balanced and averagely executed map.
"And mappers tend to overdo it so it's terrible. Can you make 10 "basic" maps that implement a concept well? Can you make them as attractive as this? This is linear, yes, but that's not a bad thing"
Nah mappers overdoing it was a fad/trend which happened about two years ago, and hasn't been repeated at bwm since. Most mappers at this site can make 10 basic maps and implement a basic concept in them well. They also can make them easily as attractive as this. I didn't even realize this map had exceptional decoration, apparently the many maps who look just as pretty if not prettier on this site don't matter. Yes, the map is linear, and yes, that is a bad thing for gameplay all-over. It leads to imbalances racially, and can create static and boring turtley gameplay because players cannot easily out-maneuver eachother, and the immobile race in each matchup is clearly favoured.
"Manhattan, LOL! Seriously, stop making your opinions sound like facts. Don't let the "beauty" of the map's design fool you, I can make a pretty map, even with unwalkable tiles, heck, have you played "Strip Jessica Alba" before?
Imo, the author can do a better job, but it seems too plain. I wouldn't play this map if I had an option to not play it" Agreed.
"Distance between main and nat isn't "unbearable" but it's certainly longer than most maps that are played currently, like Python.
It feels like there should be more expos" Agreed.
"main to nat is too long for zergs.
there are no safe overlord spots.
nat to nat is too close for zerg
2 gate zlot or simple marines, sunken colonies won't be ready.
because of that, a terran timed push is incredible strong vs protoss" mostly Agreed. You could argue against this on the basis of symantecs, but it's largely correct, especially if you extrapolate the implications of the post to any degree.
""I can, i have one of the best deco here "
I understand that you're upset, and are looking for something to support your position, but that doesn't give you the right to put down everyone else in this community by claiming you have "one of the best deco here"."
Target, if you aren't trolling, you're being stupid. If you are trolling, stop, or leave this site. | | ProTosS4EveR | | | | my apologizes, i was upset | | Nightmarjoo | | | | lolwut | | JungleTerrain | | | | Lol someone on this site just got dominated. | | XeLious | | | | No, Thank youuuuu for making a better map than humpdeadmoose i mean nightmarjoo | | testbug | | | xelious i don't knoe why do you hate nightmarjoo so much, but we already know he doesn't makes maps.
some times he has free time and spend few minutes in a n00b map, but he doesn't colaborate with us making the best maps. he just helps the other mappers.
what's your problem? insulting him because his maps aren't the best, instead of satying thaks for helping for free! | | ProTosS4EveR | | | | no one can dominate marjoo the amerikan fuhrer | | Nightmarjoo | | | | I help with the best maps too :( | | JungleTerrain | | | | XeLious is JeaLious! |
| Replays
Upload replay for this map |
(4)Thank You
