Mains are at the 5 and 11 o'clock positions. A wide ramp is made smaller with destructible rocks. The rocks create a smaller choke that is similarly walled off with a Barracks and two Supply Depots. A close third is blocked by a pair of destructible rocks. Larger than a standard Blizzard map making the rush distances longer and paths wider.
In my opinion, just in my opinion, you should add some sort of incentive to holding the middle area, like maybe a ....magical ray of healing (a slow aoe heal)
In my opinion, just in my opinion, you should add some sort of incentive to holding the middle area, like maybe a ....magical ray of healing (a slow aoe heal)
I don't think there needs to be incentive to hold the middle. I actually hope that it becomes less important in the late game.
what are the watchtowers for? one can see an attack coming from high yield are a little bit sooner but no additinal info than that given by this positon anyway. correct me if i am wrong?
other that that like the layout a lot. I love openness betwen centre and third. would be fun to have a protecting cliff there in front of third for though that is open for defensive or ofensive drops.
could be intereting to have north main/nat moved a bit to west and south main/nat a bit to east for quicker drops on gold/opponent's fourth and creepspread in these regions.
this would make better use of space and you have a more compact map.
The Xel'Naga watch towers allow sight of the quickest path between the opponent and your gold expansion, can give a little sight into the gold expansion, watch the path to the fourth expansion, and watch the path to the back ramp of the third expansion.
I'm debating just making the 4th a little smaller, therefore pushing the minerals closer to the center and making it feel closer.
The Xel'Naga watch towers allow sight of the quickest path between the opponent and your gold expansion, can give a little sight into the gold expansion, watch the path to the fourth expansion, and watch the path to the back ramp of the third expansion.
I'm debating just making the 4th a little smaller, therefore pushing the minerals closer to the center and making it feel closer.
so do you expect that the main forces cover the area towards centre and players try to have more information and move a smaller force to xel'naga?
I think the xel'nagas can be used to create an area of conflict (centre position) or give vital info like realy control over an area that is otherwise really hard to control. if it only gives extra vision in an area that is kind of controlled anyway i am not to fond of the watchtowers.
have you tried moving them towards the gaps left and right of the bridge, sothat they overlook bridge and into gold? by that you can give players the feeling that they are really important and opponents will try to have control over both. just an idea.
there should be a real discussion about watchtowers. what do you think about the placement in my new map? i think they are devensively positioned, but to take control you have to go through the middle. you can not take this defensive bonus once you lost map control in the central area. this is a possibility for an interesting placement I think.
(edit: this is not an advertisment. i think it is a point to discuss)
Moonlit Monastery
Features:
Overview Image:
More Images:
Map Analyzer Images:
Notes:
Mains are at the 5 and 11 o'clock positions. A wide ramp is made smaller with destructible rocks. The rocks create a smaller choke that is similarly walled off with a Barracks and two Supply Depots. A close third is blocked by a pair of destructible rocks. Larger than a standard Blizzard map making the rush distances longer and paths wider.
Any comments or questions are appreciated.
My Other Maps
Orbital Decay
In my opinion, just in my opinion, you should add some sort of incentive to holding the middle area, like maybe a ....magical ray of healing (a slow aoe heal)
I don't think there needs to be incentive to hold the middle. I actually hope that it becomes less important in the late game.
what are the watchtowers for? one can see an attack coming from high yield are a little bit sooner but no additinal info than that given by this positon anyway. correct me if i am wrong?
other that that like the layout a lot. I love openness betwen centre and third. would be fun to have a protecting cliff there in front of third for though that is open for defensive or ofensive drops.
could be intereting to have north main/nat moved a bit to west and south main/nat a bit to east for quicker drops on gold/opponent's fourth and creepspread in these regions. this would make better use of space and you have a more compact map.
@Samro225am: Go
The Xel'Naga watch towers allow sight of the quickest path between the opponent and your gold expansion, can give a little sight into the gold expansion, watch the path to the fourth expansion, and watch the path to the back ramp of the third expansion.
I'm debating just making the 4th a little smaller, therefore pushing the minerals closer to the center and making it feel closer.
so do you expect that the main forces cover the area towards centre and players try to have more information and move a smaller force to xel'naga? I think the xel'nagas can be used to create an area of conflict (centre position) or give vital info like realy control over an area that is otherwise really hard to control. if it only gives extra vision in an area that is kind of controlled anyway i am not to fond of the watchtowers. have you tried moving them towards the gaps left and right of the bridge, sothat they overlook bridge and into gold? by that you can give players the feeling that they are really important and opponents will try to have control over both. just an idea.
there should be a real discussion about watchtowers. what do you think about the placement in my new map? i think they are devensively positioned, but to take control you have to go through the middle. you can not take this defensive bonus once you lost map control in the central area. this is a possibility for an interesting placement I think.
(edit: this is not an advertisment. i think it is a point to discuss)