Thx for feedback!

We will review this issue as soon as possible and will try to report you back about our progress!

Regards, iCCup tech crew.


  • « назад
  • 1
  • вперед »
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#1 Posted: 30 Nov 2016 @ 23:20 CET  
 
  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Head Admin Assistant
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 18:51 CET
#2 Posted: 04 Dec 2016 @ 06:05 CET  
 

I like this map, it could be a new shape of FS

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#3 Posted: 15 Dec 2016 @ 17:25 CET  
 

15th December 2016

Version 0.95 Crown And Sceptre

Changing name to Jukado.

-Water cliff snip at TL nat.

-3 o clock ramp tile changed back.

-Grass BR main SL.

-Water at 3 o clock.

-Grass centre mirrored.

-Water cliff at bottom left nat entrance.

-Tank hole at 6 o clock (mirrored tile).

-Grass tile and dirt tile at top right nat entrance.

-Improved ramps (and ramp palette).

-Asphalt at 3 o clock water cliff

-Retesting mining at TR main and its fast. (worker wobble for zerg but its fast).

-Testing trying to ramp stack bug at TR main but couldn’t.

-Cliff at TL nat entrance.

-Changed author name to Jukado

-Improved water clutter at 6 and 12 o clock (switched out vision tiles).

-Mud behind 12 o clock.

Overview

CAS 0.95 vs FS gif

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#4 Posted: 16 Dec 2016 @ 11:34 CET  
 

Hello mod, the map is still called (4)Crown And Sceptre.

It is my name that is changing to Jukado from CardinalAllin. Ive created a new account on iCCup called Jukado. I cant post with it yet though because I havent logged in with it. I cant do that because my internet is broken on my brood war playing machine.

So if you could just change the title of the thread to "Map (4)Crown And Sceptre" that would be grand.

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Head Admin Assistant
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 18:51 CET
#5 Posted: 14 Feb @ 18:56 CET  
 

am I wrong or it's missing a mineral path without gas bottom left?

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 31 Mar @ 09:42 CET
#6 Posted: 16 Feb @ 15:53 CET  
 

This is dota? Or starcraft?

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#7 Posted: 20 Feb @ 23:51 CET  
 

@Face, I dont think there is anything missing. The map uses what I call 'black sheep' symmetry where 1 main and nat is going in the 'wrong' direction. If we compare to Fighting Spirit then in this case it would be the top left main and nat that is going in the wrong direction. The map has 2 mineral only bases.

@Meepo-MP err its starcraft (brood war).

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Head Admin Assistant
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 18:51 CET
#8 Posted: 21 Feb @ 13:46 CET  
 

I wasnt talking about the "black sheep" thing.

I was talking about the alone mineral paths around the middle at 12 and 4 oclock, isn't missing one at 8?

Or I'm just curious why it's not been added, to balance the ""black sheep" maybe?

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#9 Posted: 22 Feb @ 15:46 CET  
 

I wrote a really long reply and it got eaten by the forum. I dont have time to write it all again.

Ah right you were talking about adding an extra 'mineral only base'. I thought this might have been what you were saying but had to check.

At the moment:

-you have to move out properly onto the map in order to take a 4th base.

-you either get easier access to a 4th gas or you get easier access to a 7th base in a map split scenario.

----------------------------------

----------------------------------

Adding an extra mineral only base at 8 o clock would make:

-top right vs bottom left map splits decidedly less balanced.

-top left vs bottom right map splits less balanced.

-top vs bottom map splits different but not more balanced.

In reality it would probably negatively impact balance and gameplay too. Balance wise it would probably just make terran stronger. And gameplay wise it would probably just incentivise passive play more.

Overall I think the current set up is in a good place. If there was an extra mineral only base at 8, and a terran were to spawn at bottom left, they would be able to go up to 4 bases too easily and in a boring manner. This would be the only spawn that could do so.

But with the current set up, you have to move out properly onto the map to take a 4th base, and this is the same for all spawns. This is the most important factor that determines the layout of the bases.

  •   
  • 0
  •  
Edited by CardinalAllin (22 Feb @ 15:46 CET)
avatar
  • Head Admin Assistant
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 18:51 CET
#10 Posted: 22 Feb @ 16:39 CET  
 

My consideration was simply numeric based.

Every spawning point has 1 natural + 1 exp access. Then there is an expo in middle.

I just dont understand why we have two minerals path only at 12 and 4 oclock, why not 3 to make a triangle, or 4 to have one for each spawning point.

Was just a curiosity of mine, not saying it's bad or so.

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#11 Posted: 24 Feb @ 22:57 CET  
 

Having 3 mineral only bases in a triangle would look great and would be nice in some ways, I did consider it. And having 4 bases would make sense in that its a 4 spawn map I agree, again I did consider it. But for the reasons above I chose to go with 2 instead. (having 4 would definitely boost terran too much)

Also, if you imagine the map with no mineral only bases for a moment. You might look at the map and think hmm it would be good if there was a base at 12 o clock. So you add it in. But then you will see that top vs bottom map splits would be decidedly less balanced. So you need to add in a 2nd mineral only base. But you might not want bases to be too close to each other. The layout doesnt give many options for places to even put a mineral only base. So lack of available space plays a factor in addition to the other reasons.

The end result is meant to be a good mix between giving options for players to expand in different directions, giving reasonable map split scenarios, and not too turtly gameplay.

  •   
  • 0
  •  
Edited by CardinalAllin (24 Feb @ 23:01 CET)
avatar
  • Head Admin Assistant
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 18:51 CET
#12 Posted: 25 Feb @ 02:02 CET  
 

I suggest so to remove those minerlas so. Maybe make it special adding a little island at 12.

I like this map, and Id like to run for tournaments and maybe replace fs, but there is something bad in the design actually

  •   
  • 0
  •  
Edited by iCCup.Face (25 Feb @ 02:21 CET)
avatar
  • Visited: 03 Apr @ 17:55 CET
#13 Posted: 27 Feb @ 08:50 CET  
 

Looks great!

  •   
  • 0
  •  
avatar
  • Visited: 22 Apr @ 10:54 CET
#14 Posted: 27 Feb @ 21:22 CET  
 

@Face I like your idea of having 12 as an island, indeed I considered it while making the map. I also think that the map would still be good even if the mineral only bases were removed. At the moment my preference is to keep the mineral only bases though.

Having the base at 12 o clock in particular allows Protoss players to 'expand away from Terran', a feature quite a few people seem to really like. With that said, some Protoss players have chosen to 'expand away' by directly taking the empty natural as their 3rd base.

However, I feel the map is playing well giving fun and balanced games so Im happy with the current state. Its like playing on FS but with a few little differences that add interest.

@mwperk01 Thanks :)

  •   
  • 0
  •  
  • « назад
  • 1
  • вперед »
Do you want to take part in forum discussions? Join us!, or Login.