xinehp Profile Joined July 2010 United States 29 Posts Last Edited: 2014-09-12 05:51:24 #1



This is rv. 1 of my new Melee map, titled Breakridge Fortress.



This is a four-spawn map using rotational symmetry.



Map size: 148x148.



The rotation of the map is blocked by destructible ice, destroy this to gain a shorter reinforcement distance and enable further expansions.



An easily guarded third has destructible ice between it and your natural. Additionally it has collapsible rocks for easier defense.





It is published on NA as Breakridge Fortress by EMP, feel free to play it and comment with ideas!













Hi TL!This is rv. 1 of my new Melee map, titled Breakridge Fortress.This is a four-spawn map using rotational symmetry.Map size: 148x148.The rotation of the map is blocked by destructible ice, destroy this to gain a shorter reinforcement distance and enable further expansions.An easily guarded third has destructible ice between it and your natural. Additionally it has collapsible rocks for easier defense.It is published on NA as Breakridge Fortress by EMP, feel free to play it and comment with ideas!

GeneralSezme Profile Joined July 2014 United States 58 Posts Last Edited: 2014-09-12 05:00:58 #2 Overview please? I can't really put the map together with the little pieces you provided, thanks. Melee map maker

xinehp Profile Joined July 2010 United States 29 Posts #3 On September 12 2014 14:00 GeneralSezme wrote:

Overview please? I can't really put the map together with the little pieces you provided, thanks.





Added. Added.

IeZaeL Profile Joined July 2012 Italy 967 Posts #4 wait why the pretty pics have doodads in them and the overview has none? Author of Coda and Eastwatch.

xinehp Profile Joined July 2010 United States 29 Posts #5 On September 12 2014 19:47 IeZaeL wrote:

wait why the pretty pics have doodads in them and the overview has none?





I thought the overview should focus more on the layout than the appearance. I thought the overview should focus more on the layout than the appearance.

GeneralSezme Profile Joined July 2014 United States 58 Posts #6 On September 13 2014 05:31 xinehp wrote:

Show nested quote +

On September 12 2014 19:47 IeZaeL wrote:

wait why the pretty pics have doodads in them and the overview has none?





I thought the overview should focus more on the layout than the appearance. I thought the overview should focus more on the layout than the appearance.

Your right.



And i think you should make the choke larger going from your natural to the middle of the map, that pathway, but still keep it the same amount of buildings to wall off. Your right.And i think you should make the choke larger going from your natural to the middle of the map, that pathway, but still keep it the same amount of buildings to wall off. Melee map maker

Timetwister22 Profile Joined March 2011 United States 538 Posts Last Edited: 2014-09-13 00:57:11 #7



However, I will say this map has a variety of flaws that will make it imbalanced for competitive play. The main reason being that the thirds are not balanced for both players. As I said earlier, both players are taking the same base by design, yet one player will have a tougher time taking the base rather than the other player. In this case, the counterclockwise player has the advantage. This is because the counterclockwise player just has to break down the 6x6 rocks on the ramp, and then they have a close third that is far from the opponent and easy to defend. Yet at the same time, the clockwise player has a much tougher time. Considering both players want to expand away from their opponent, the clockwise player has to go through rocks, defend a ramp, and deal with the super long distance to their third. In other words, if player A spawns at 12 o'clock, and player B spawns at 3 o'clock, player B has a way harder time taking their third.

Here is an image to help show you what I'm talking about:

+ Show Spoiler +



As you can see, player B(red) has a lot more distance to cover, and also has to defend more attack paths, one of which is really wide (the ramp). As you can see, player B(red) has a lot more distance to cover, and also has to defend more attack paths, one of which is really wide (the ramp).



This is an issue that greatly impacts balance, and is actually quite common on a lot of 4p rota maps, so don't feel bad. It's the easy mistakes and tough balancing that comes with 4p maps that drives most mapmakers away from them. Now, when looking at how to fix the issue here on your map, I'm not so certain you can. Sure, the issue could be dealt with, but then the changes would probably make this map an entirely different map all together. So, just keep this in mind for your next 4p rota map.



As far as removing doodads for the overview, don't bother. Yes the layout is more important than the aesthetics, but there are two reasons you should show off aesthetics in the overview. 1) Most players who are looking to play on cool custom maps will solely base their choice on aesthetics. I know, it's cruel, but that's how the world turns. 2) Good aesthetics are an easy way to demonstrate the polish, quality, time, and effort that you put into the map as a whole. 3) It's not a bad thing unless the aesthetics make the overview too hard to read. If you have doodads like what you have, which don't make the map hard to read whatsoever, then it's totally fine leaving them on there. Any sort of good player or mapmaker should be able to easily look through the aesthetics and begin to understand the layout upon looking at an overview that has aesthetics.



Hope it helps! There are a few ideas I like here. When creating a 12 base 4p rota map, there is always a struggle to make sure both third options are still close, while the nat-nat rush distance is still reasonable. Your use of the backdoors to the nat help deal with this issue, by allowing shorted distances to the thirds while keeping early game nat-nat rush distance fairly short. Thus, making the map much easier to balance. Additionally, I like how the third plays out differently depending on which spawn you are in relation to your opponent. Even though technically it is the same base for both players due to the symmetry, it will play out differently depending if your opponent is counterclockwise, or clockwise of your spawn. Adds some nice variety.However, I will say this map has a variety of flaws that will make it imbalanced for competitive play. The main reason being that the thirds are not balanced for both players. As I said earlier, both players are taking the same base by design, yet one player will have a tougher time taking the base rather than the other player. In this case, the counterclockwise player has the advantage. This is because the counterclockwise player just has to break down the 6x6 rocks on the ramp, and then they have a close third that is far from the opponent and easy to defend. Yet at the same time, the clockwise player has a much tougher time. Considering both players want to expand away from their opponent, the clockwise player has to go through rocks, defend a ramp, and deal with the super long distance to their third. In other words, if player A spawns at 12 o'clock, and player B spawns at 3 o'clock, player B has a way harder time taking their third.Here is an image to help show you what I'm talking about:This is an issue that greatly impacts balance, and is actually quite common on a lot of 4p rota maps, so don't feel bad. It's the easy mistakes and tough balancing that comes with 4p maps that drives most mapmakers away from them. Now, when looking at how to fix the issue here on your map, I'm not so certain you can. Sure, the issue could be dealt with, but then the changes would probably make this map an entirely different map all together. So, just keep this in mind for your next 4p rota map.As far as removing doodads for the overview, don't bother. Yes the layout is more important than the aesthetics, but there are two reasons you should show off aesthetics in the overview. 1) Most players who are looking to play on cool custom maps will solely base their choice on aesthetics. I know, it's cruel, but that's how the world turns. 2) Good aesthetics are an easy way to demonstrate the polish, quality, time, and effort that you put into the map as a whole. 3) It's not a bad thing unless the aesthetics make the overview too hard to read. If you have doodads like what you have, which don't make the map hard to read whatsoever, then it's totally fine leaving them on there. Any sort of good player or mapmaker should be able to easily look through the aesthetics and begin to understand the layout upon looking at an overview that has aesthetics.Hope it helps! Former ESV Mapmaker | @Timetwister22

xinehp Profile Joined July 2010 United States 29 Posts #8 On September 13 2014 09:56 Timetwister22 wrote:

There are a few ideas I like here. When creating a 12 base 4p rota map, there is always a struggle to make sure both third options are still close, while the nat-nat rush distance is still reasonable. Your use of the backdoors to the nat help deal with this issue, by allowing shorted distances to the thirds while keeping early game nat-nat rush distance fairly short. Thus, making the map much easier to balance. Additionally, I like how the third plays out differently depending on which spawn you are in relation to your opponent. Even though technically it is the same base for both players due to the symmetry, it will play out differently depending if your opponent is counterclockwise, or clockwise of your spawn. Adds some nice variety.



However, I will say this map has a variety of flaws that will make it imbalanced for competitive play. The main reason being that the thirds are not balanced for both players. As I said earlier, both players are taking the same base by design, yet one player will have a tougher time taking the base rather than the other player. In this case, the counterclockwise player has the advantage. This is because the counterclockwise player just has to break down the 6x6 rocks on the ramp, and then they have a close third that is far from the opponent and easy to defend. Yet at the same time, the clockwise player has a much tougher time. Considering both players want to expand away from their opponent, the clockwise player has to go through rocks, defend a ramp, and deal with the super long distance to their third. In other words, if player A spawns at 12 o'clock, and player B spawns at 3 o'clock, player B has a way harder time taking their third.

Here is an image to help show you what I'm talking about:

+ Show Spoiler +



As you can see, player B(red) has a lot more distance to cover, and also has to defend more attack paths, one of which is really wide (the ramp). As you can see, player B(red) has a lot more distance to cover, and also has to defend more attack paths, one of which is really wide (the ramp).



This is an issue that greatly impacts balance, and is actually quite common on a lot of 4p rota maps, so don't feel bad. It's the easy mistakes and tough balancing that comes with 4p maps that drives most mapmakers away from them. Now, when looking at how to fix the issue here on your map, I'm not so certain you can. Sure, the issue could be dealt with, but then the changes would probably make this map an entirely different map all together. So, just keep this in mind for your next 4p rota map.



As far as removing doodads for the overview, don't bother. Yes the layout is more important than the aesthetics, but there are two reasons you should show off aesthetics in the overview. 1) Most players who are looking to play on cool custom maps will solely base their choice on aesthetics. I know, it's cruel, but that's how the world turns. 2) Good aesthetics are an easy way to demonstrate the polish, quality, time, and effort that you put into the map as a whole. 3) It's not a bad thing unless the aesthetics make the overview too hard to read. If you have doodads like what you have, which don't make the map hard to read whatsoever, then it's totally fine leaving them on there. Any sort of good player or mapmaker should be able to easily look through the aesthetics and begin to understand the layout upon looking at an overview that has aesthetics.



Hope it helps! There are a few ideas I like here. When creating a 12 base 4p rota map, there is always a struggle to make sure both third options are still close, while the nat-nat rush distance is still reasonable. Your use of the backdoors to the nat help deal with this issue, by allowing shorted distances to the thirds while keeping early game nat-nat rush distance fairly short. Thus, making the map much easier to balance. Additionally, I like how the third plays out differently depending on which spawn you are in relation to your opponent. Even though technically it is the same base for both players due to the symmetry, it will play out differently depending if your opponent is counterclockwise, or clockwise of your spawn. Adds some nice variety.However, I will say this map has a variety of flaws that will make it imbalanced for competitive play. The main reason being that the thirds are not balanced for both players. As I said earlier, both players are taking the same base by design, yet one player will have a tougher time taking the base rather than the other player. In this case, the counterclockwise player has the advantage. This is because the counterclockwise player just has to break down the 6x6 rocks on the ramp, and then they have a close third that is far from the opponent and easy to defend. Yet at the same time, the clockwise player has a much tougher time. Considering both players want to expand away from their opponent, the clockwise player has to go through rocks, defend a ramp, and deal with the super long distance to their third. In other words, if player A spawns at 12 o'clock, and player B spawns at 3 o'clock, player B has a way harder time taking their third.Here is an image to help show you what I'm talking about:This is an issue that greatly impacts balance, and is actually quite common on a lot of 4p rota maps, so don't feel bad. It's the easy mistakes and tough balancing that comes with 4p maps that drives most mapmakers away from them. Now, when looking at how to fix the issue here on your map, I'm not so certain you can. Sure, the issue could be dealt with, but then the changes would probably make this map an entirely different map all together. So, just keep this in mind for your next 4p rota map.As far as removing doodads for the overview, don't bother. Yes the layout is more important than the aesthetics, but there are two reasons you should show off aesthetics in the overview. 1) Most players who are looking to play on cool custom maps will solely base their choice on aesthetics. I know, it's cruel, but that's how the world turns. 2) Good aesthetics are an easy way to demonstrate the polish, quality, time, and effort that you put into the map as a whole. 3) It's not a bad thing unless the aesthetics make the overview too hard to read. If you have doodads like what you have, which don't make the map hard to read whatsoever, then it's totally fine leaving them on there. Any sort of good player or mapmaker should be able to easily look through the aesthetics and begin to understand the layout upon looking at an overview that has aesthetics.Hope it helps!





Thanks for the feedback. This is my first map since getting HOTS a few weeks ago.



What would your opinion be of forcing cross spawns?

Thanks for the feedback. This is my first map since getting HOTS a few weeks ago.What would your opinion be of forcing cross spawns?

Timetwister22 Profile Joined March 2011 United States 538 Posts #9 Forcing cross would resolve this issue, so not a bad idea for making this map playable. Though, forcing cross is never ideal. But I wouldn't blame you honestly. 4p maps are hard to do really well, and often have to have force spawns. For the near future maps, try and stick to 2p. Will open up the doors in terms of layout viability, which in the long term will help you learn more about mapmaking in general. Former ESV Mapmaker | @Timetwister22