| PhilipJayFry | | |
All the asphalt ground is unbuildable, exept infront of the nat and at the expos of course ;)
its the first time i made this kind of symmetry using the xy-mirror function. so if you have any tips about that you would help me alot! |
| ArcTimes | | |
:O The middle reminds me to Icarus
Dude, it says "final" but it doesn't have deco x_x
I think tanks would own in this map
On icarus there is a path to the middle. Here tanks would own attacking and defending xd.
modified by ArcTimes |
| JungleTerrain | | |
Blue and Purples' mains are obviously smaller than Red and Teals'.
I don't really like the flow of expansion in this map. I mean, you've got a close third gas, but then it feels like you have a super long way to go to get another expansion. Maybe it would help to add a mineral only expansion somewhere for each player.
The symmetry is not well done, and I think this results in the unequal main sizes. As I said before, I think adding another expo per player, preferably a mineral only, would help the map.
|
| sTY_leZerg-eX | | |
| Who are all this new users? welcome 2bwmn but why are they garbing colored names?? |
| JungleTerrain | | |
| philipjayfray isn't exactly a "new member". He's been here before. |
| L.Lawliet | | |
Sorry sTY_leZerg-eX...
I was in the channel you guys had during your first "tournament"... and i do html and stuff... |
| CrystalDrag | | |
Pretty colors.... :D
anyway what jungleterrain said.
ugly straight lines. :O |
| ArcTimes | | |
| :O |
| PhilipJayFry | | |
Thanks for the feedback!
the mains: ive tested the size of them before i added the minerals and gas and it was almost the same, but i think you are right. after i added the minerals and played one testgame, it felt like the effective size of blue and purple are smaller. ill also try to add some mineral only expansions. thx for the tips :)
@arc: there is deco at the expos, nats and these fat ramps. i didnt put any deco in the middle because it would destroy the pattern of the asphalt and the dirt was supposed to place some buildings there like turrets or supplydepots, so doodads wouldnt be so smart there.
@leZerg: sorry i didnt know that there is a rule that colors are just for special people here. ill avoid that in the future. for all the rest of you who are worth enough to use it here is the code (<)font color="..."(>)text (<)/font(>) just without the ( ) and instead of the ... you need something like that: green or #000000
have fun ;) |
| JungleTerrain | | |
There is no rule for colors for people's names. Some of the mappers here just find it amusing/fun. I don't really care.
The thing about the mains is just that Blue and Purples' mains aren't just small, but weird. Terran usually ends up using most of the space in the mains, and they need a clearly defined area for putting supply depots/tech and another area to comfortably place about 10 factories or so. Red and teals' mains are more or less rectangular or circular, but they allow the players to place buildings comfortably in a way that separates the macro buildings from the tech and supply buildings. |
| PhilipJayFry | | |
yeah you are right. i didnt wanted to make the mains like that, but after the 5th time i started this map from scratch i couldnt find any better solution :( i watched at FS over and over to understand how they did it with this kind of symmetry, but when i made the mains like that, the concept of the expos didnt worked out. thats why i gave up after a few trys and uploaded it here to see if you guys could help me with that^^
thx again for the help! always appreciate constructive criticism :) |
| Phobic | | |
| Everyone really has their own methods for getting the symmetry. I start off with x y and xy symmetry on to map out the shapes of the corners. I then turn off x and y but leave on xy. This way i can shape the rest of the map with the corners as perspective guides. |
| Freakling | | |
I like it.
WHat you should do to fix the awkward NW/SE mains is pretty straight forward: Just move the nats, chokes, ramps formations and everything, closer towards the adjacent gas expo and realocate all the space you gain to the mains.
It looks like you need some further adjustmens in the affected quadrants of the map, namely use all the bridges vertically towards the center. You might also consider moving the ridges a bit away from the gas expos to make them more comfortable or maybe extendig the ridges so that a mineral only would fit on top of them. But you could also place these on low ground, but the huge spaces between nats and 3rds seem like the best locations to put them.
Did you protect your map? I cannot open it in the editor.
modified by Freakling |
| ArcTimes | | |
Yes, the map is protected.
>.< But i don't know why people protect their maps in this site, especially when there are lot of unprotectors that can open them :P |
| Crimson)S(hadow | | |
make sure you can make turrets behind nats
just a suggestion: make the water near the nats into unbuildable highground for safer ovie spots/muta rally points, but thats just because i'm a zerg |
| PhilipJayFry | | |
yes the map is protected^^ if somebody wants me to help with this map and change it to a better one i will upload it unprotected. i would try it on my own first but i dont have so much time right now because of my exams... :(
Freakling, i tried this with the bases at nw/se at the beginning but it always came out strange. i guess its because im totally unfamiliar with this style of symmetry^^
Crimson, i usually let some space between minerals and this highgroundcliff, but this time the nats came out very small and i couldnt do it... |
| Freakling | | |
Concerning symmetry: Your problem is that you fall for the optical illusion that isometrical terrain depicts. Most notably your E and W thirds extend over 20 tiles towards the middle while your N and S thirds only extend half that ammount (and there are similar problem with scalings and positioning all over the map).
The solution I would advocate is that you use wide grids. I normally use grid 1 of 1024 spacing and grid 2 with 256 spacing. This devides your map into 16 (4x4) sections with 16 (4x4) subsections each. All you have to do then is place analogous parts of the map (p.e. all the nats) in accordantly symmetrical sections. that should give you a good basic idea which you can then tweak.
Inherently asymmetric objects like bridges need some extra tweakig.
For turret space in the nats - there's enough space to fit it in, just use the space between your mineral lines and the edge were there's now a cliff, you do not really need that. |
| Freakling | | |
I added GMCS to illustrate what I think should be changed.
I would also interchange the positions of the narrow and wide bridges to the middle and ideally the final outcome should allow somewhat similar scout and army pathing for all positional matchups. |
| PhilipJayFry | | |
| Thanks Freakling! didnt expected so much help^^ i will try to change it as soon as possible, but it might take some weeks until i have time for that :/ |
(4)Barzak 1.0
