Report, edit, etc...Posted by Death-Link on 2005-05-28 at 15:52:02
Those crappy LT for 6 and 8 players make me want to bash the crap outta the bozo that made them. 
They look like shit.
So this is my version of Lost Temple for 8 players. Each main has 8 minerals, and so does the natural expo (exactly like the original LT). There are also 4 min-only expos with 6 minerals each. I decided not to add a cliff next to each player's nat expo, cause I think it would be easy for Terran to own on this map.
I haven't figured out a name for it yet, and some testing is still needed. Please tell me what you think of it, and if there are any ways to make it better and more balanced.
[attachmentid=9513]
They look like shit.So this is my version of Lost Temple for 8 players. Each main has 8 minerals, and so does the natural expo (exactly like the original LT). There are also 4 min-only expos with 6 minerals each. I decided not to add a cliff next to each player's nat expo, cause I think it would be easy for Terran to own on this map.
I haven't figured out a name for it yet, and some testing is still needed. Please tell me what you think of it, and if there are any ways to make it better and more balanced.
[attachmentid=9513]
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Chef on 2005-05-28 at 16:02:05
I can't see any Lost Temple stratagies being used on this map. I suggest you just drop the LT thing, and call it your own. I don't think anyone's going to want to get the middle expos, as all it takes it one Terran to kill them all. If it were unbuildable highground maybe... Do you plan to have people play full house on this map?
ADDITION:
Forgot to mention, dropping is going to be a pain (it's too easy), and Terran are always going to know where to scan their neighbor (since siege tanks effectivly make it worthless to build in a large part of the base).
ADDITION:
Forgot to mention, dropping is going to be a pain (it's too easy), and Terran are always going to know where to scan their neighbor (since siege tanks effectivly make it worthless to build in a large part of the base).
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2005-05-28 at 17:36:34
To add to what losttemplar said, the two bottom spots have more easily defendable ramps.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by mobomojo on 2005-05-29 at 01:37:22
Um... a few things.
1] the thing that made LT "Lost Temple" is because there was actually a TEMPLE in the center of the map. this does not.
2] the whole feel of LT is lost when every other player is right next to another. it doesnt even feel like an 8-player map when the other guy can easily be tanked.
3] if you really want an 8-player LT, at least attempt it on a bigger map size. 192x192, probably. the way it is now is just too cramped.
1] the thing that made LT "Lost Temple" is because there was actually a TEMPLE in the center of the map. this does not.
2] the whole feel of LT is lost when every other player is right next to another. it doesnt even feel like an 8-player map when the other guy can easily be tanked.
3] if you really want an 8-player LT, at least attempt it on a bigger map size. 192x192, probably. the way it is now is just too cramped.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Panschk on 2005-05-29 at 05:07:20
Never make melee maps with more than 128*128. The minimap is so small then, you just do not want to play such maps. Actually your map looks really nice, you can not expect more from a 8 player map with choke, but don't even think about calling it LT for 8. LT is a 4 player map, and those horrible 6 player versions are only played by newbies anyway.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Death-Link on 2005-05-29 at 05:33:49
Of course I'm not going to name it LT for 8.
to mobomojo: Well I can't do much on a 128x128 map (192x192 is too big), the distance from one player to its neighbours is actually small, but there is nothing I can do about it. Neither the LT for 8 that has been going around battle.net has any temples, they just took LT for 6 and put 2 massive cliffs in the middle of the map (where the temples go) and placed 2 start locations. That was a dumb idea.
This map is for 3v3 games (if you want 2v2 why not play LT?
) The normal LT strategies won't probably have some effect on this map, because 3v3 is completely different that 2v2.
As for the siege tanks attacking the neighbouring base, I can't add any higher grounds (like High Temple or High Raised Jungle) cause there will be that gap at the end right next to the water, and it still won't solve the problem. I've thought about making the distance larger between the bases, probably by seperating the bases with water. This is my main concern, all ideas are welcome.
to mobomojo: Well I can't do much on a 128x128 map (192x192 is too big), the distance from one player to its neighbours is actually small, but there is nothing I can do about it. Neither the LT for 8 that has been going around battle.net has any temples, they just took LT for 6 and put 2 massive cliffs in the middle of the map (where the temples go) and placed 2 start locations. That was a dumb idea.
This map is for 3v3 games (if you want 2v2 why not play LT?
) The normal LT strategies won't probably have some effect on this map, because 3v3 is completely different that 2v2.As for the siege tanks attacking the neighbouring base, I can't add any higher grounds (like High Temple or High Raised Jungle) cause there will be that gap at the end right next to the water, and it still won't solve the problem. I've thought about making the distance larger between the bases, probably by seperating the bases with water. This is my main concern, all ideas are welcome.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2005-05-29 at 11:21:55
If this map is for 3v3 then take out two start locations and you can give more room.
The LT 6 player maps I've seen are like those "borg" ones where instead of 2 islands they are start locations.
The LT 6 player maps I've seen are like those "borg" ones where instead of 2 islands they are start locations.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Yenku on 2005-05-29 at 19:24:19
I have never seen a modded lt.
This isnt lt. It doesnt have the islands, the nats are in front of the ramps (in lt you get to the ramp before the nat). Everything is just too cramped and i cannot see anybody playing this.
This isnt lt. It doesnt have the islands, the nats are in front of the ramps (in lt you get to the ramp before the nat). Everything is just too cramped and i cannot see anybody playing this.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by chuiu on 2005-05-29 at 23:47:41
I saw and played the map Devilesk is talking about. Let me just say this ... LT is a classic, do not change or modify it. It's perfect how it is (well with the exception of the neo version, balance changes are nice 
).
This isn't even near LT ... so it would be better renaming it to something else.
).This isn't even near LT ... so it would be better renaming it to something else.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-05-30 at 17:38:07
removing the center would be an improvement
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Yenku on 2005-05-31 at 17:08:18
yea im not a fan of the high ground.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Oo.Kevjak.oO on 2005-06-02 at 16:50:29
I think terran would be too rapey by far. Tanks in the center, tanks on the sides of naturals, tanks over the expos, tanks everywhere is how i see this map getting played......