| Nightmarjoo | | |
Mostly finished, but not entirely.
I dunno why the mains are so ugly looking, hoping to fix that :(
The mineral block at the nat's backdoor is 15 stacked 0 value minerals, 75% of the Destination backdoor ramp mineral only block.
Is this impossible pvt? I'm concerned it's too tight. |
| sTY_leZerG-eX | | |
Very nice , I really like it ,just add the doodads and its good to go :)
I want 2 play a nice epic Z vs T in this one!(No Idea if its 2 tight 4 P v T) |
| trcc | | |
It seems you frequently use the "mains ugly looking issue"
Do you mean by this:
1. They are really just ugly looking decowise
2. Their shape will affect gameplay and this is why they are ugly.
modified by trcc |
| Crimson)S(hadow | | |
| it looks a bit tight... can you tank the nat's from the back? maybe t will do something bitchy using the back of the nat+the cliff behind that |
| Grief_Stricken | | |
"it looks a bit tight"... a bit, hmm ;]???
nmjoo - u rly dunno how to use this size,do u??
and like it wouldn't be tight enough u have placed expos left/right the mid. bridge;after players will expo there these pathes would be blocked.
the nat setup is typical nmjoo style; u will need a considerable army to break thru the main.
the resource amount is huge for a map with such a size. 5 gas per player,wow - you wont starve on this.except the middle ones,on the left/right the large bridge,all these expos are shameless easy to defend.
considering the tightness overall i can see how z/p should deal vs t??? |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
The 3rd gas is perhaps easy to defend, but very hard to reinforce later in the game. The highground expos are easily cliffable, and pretty easy to attack. It's easy for you to be away from your expos and thus easy to attack them and hard to reinforce, so they must be fairly defensible otherwise they'd be nearly impossible to hold while also moving around the map.
Maps with fewer than 5 gases per player feel poor. Example: Bluestorm. Most maps have atleast 5 gases per player.
The nat outside of the backdoor is typical good-map-style.
The area around the 3/9 lowground expos is supposed to be tight, I didn't accidentally put a bridge right there -_-
I think t can tank stuff from the backdoor, but not otherwise. I think if p lets him get that far it's protoss' fault.
trcc, 2. mostly. I find that if the shape of the mains isn't "attractive" it also happens to not be in the best proportion and shape, and thus can either be awkward or downright detrimental for gameplay. This rule is far from fool-proof, but as a general rule seems to function alright.
But yeah my biggest concerns are largely about if the middle should stay the way it is, or if it should be modified, and if so, how so?
I'm worried that just taking out the bridge and maybe adding some temple stuff won't be enough to prevent the extreme linearity of the map.
Ideas on the middle? |
| Testbug | | |
i was going to say the same!
this map is tight enough, the lowground multies (where you placed the cyan start location)
when you take those expos, that extra path gets blocked, adn you'll only have the bridge and the higround (wuch can hit the expo)
nat to nat is too long |
| frontliner | | |
| A very pretty map.. |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| So what do you suggest? |
| Testbug | | |
take a look at Destination, there are lots of places with 4 entrances. and becuase of the 96 dimension, there are no expos making the center even tighter.
the diferense is that destiniy bridges helps P>T instead of making the game T>P i don't know why... maybe Grief or Inept can explain us |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
Well I don't want to copy Destination's middle, so what should I do with the middle?
I was thinking of making a narrow river connecting the two water sections similar to the middle in (2)Undying Lands, except there'd be a small hole creating a tight choke in the middle. That would reduce linearity a little bit (I would have to enlarge the current bridges a bit I think though) while making the available space in the middle greater than it is now, what do you think? |
| Trooper | | |
| yeah middle does make it have as nightmarjoo would say, "Ugly looking issue." wide and just crappy looking, |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| your mom is wide and crappy looking |
| Manhattan | | |
| But my mom's a good use of space. |
| sTY_leZerG-eX | | |
| LOL'Z |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| No, as I've stated so many times before, simply filling space is not the same as using it well. |
| sTY_leZerG-eX | | |
IL be honest i don't dislike it the way it is :)
I think map looks great and fun. |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
Thanks, but I'm sure I can work on it more to improve it. Just criticism is ok, but I can see most of that stuff myself. I'd like suggestions on specific changes you guys have in mind.
Grief/Testbug pointed out some flaws, but I'm not sure the best way to fix them, ideas? |
| Grief_Stricken | | |
| guess i did it already >> flaws;the entire middle should be redone - it's pretty tight there.choose w/e u think gives the landscape a natural touch - i suggest water - temple/h.dirt could be used for this purpose as well. i would erase the minonlies as well, so that these 2 pathes can be free.also i will enlarge the ramps on 7 & 1 to make it a bit easier to attack;there r too much money and far to easy to defend |
| sTY_leZerG-eX | | |
| Nightmarjoo plz finish this map , |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| lol I didn't know anyone cared about it. I had just abandoned it. What do you want done with the map? |
| Testbug | | |
remove the expos in the middle.
read grief's comment |
| sTY_leZerG-eX | | |
The map is very cool , but It could change some little things (I recommend):
-Make mains better looking.
-And fix the middle
-Add some details doodads ... |
| Nightmarjoo | | |
| I have an idea for the middle inspired somewhat by Undying Lands, I guess I'll try to fix this map sometime soon. |
(2)RatatoskrRatatoskr.jpg)
