Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Back to List

Lowland Crossing Revised v2 Featured

By Quanto
Rating:

Start points are now more fair, also the water passages are crossable by amphibious units. Official Tournament Map by Quanto. Revised by sprang.
Size: 6 x 8

PLAY ON THIS MAP


Downloads: 4894
Manual downloads:
http://api.springfiles.com/files/maps/lowland_crossing_revised_v2.sd7
http://spring1.admin-box.com/maps/lowland_crossing_revised_v2.sd7


Preview
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (24 records)
sort


FIranksprang
5 years ago
Ok, reclaim amounts are balanced now. Also corrected sun direction, and lessened brightness.

The map still has tons of reclaim.
+0 / -0


DErankAdminmojjj
5 years ago
antero, the map-ant!

THX & keep up the good work!
+0 / -0


FIranksprang
5 years ago
thx thx :)
+0 / -0




AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
3 years ago
The hitspheres on some of the rocks are ridiculously large and lead to hax and unintuitive blocking. It should be remade with these fixed.
+0 / -0

ATrankSkasi
2 years ago
Yay for accurate collision volumes! \o/


+2 / -0

PLrankOrfelius
2 years ago
It should not be remade because the only type of game it brings is... porc fest and artilery race... why would you remake a map that focuses on trench warfare?
+0 / -0


DErankAdminmojjj
2 years ago
maybe the public demand to have games with fortified structures outweight your humble opinion (although it is considered bad gameplay)?


+0 / -0

PLrankOrfelius
2 years ago
Then mayby they should play Tower Defense game instead? Not strategy game? :F
Also I don't understand what this gif has to do with my post >.<
+0 / -0


DErankAdminmojjj
2 years ago
you have to obey the gif, not attempt to understand it. because thats why you fail said some jedi guy.
+0 / -0


USrankFealthas
2 years ago
This is not a very good map for 1v1. It always becomes a porc fest, and then missile silo rush. There is no way to contest mexes, each player just gets their half of the map. Should be removed from map rotation for steam release.
+0 / -0

ATrankSkasi
2 years ago
(edited 2 years ago)

Remove Defender, problem solved! Also this is why the map needs to stay!
+0 / -0

PLrankOrfelius
2 years ago
This map almost never resolves in defender spam. You would have known that if you would actually play the game from time to time ATrankSkasi. You have played exactly 6 games on this map (according to replay tab). Last one was 4v4 9 months ago.
+0 / -0

ATrankSkasi
2 years ago
(edited 2 years ago)

As if I needed to play a map to see what other people are doing on it. Orf pls. Do you even spec bro?

edit: I even just checked some new replays just to make sure I wasn't drunk. Found three replays that didn't look completely one-sided from the player matchups. All three of them had Defender spam:
Multiplayer B349300 6 on Lowland Crossing Revised v2
Multiplayer B349256 5 on Lowland Crossing Revised v2
Multiplayer B347933 7 on Lowland Crossing Revised v2
+0 / -0


AUrankAquanim
2 years ago
(edited 2 years ago)

However, none of those replays were 1v1, which is what was being discussed. I don't remember http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/349256 being defined by defender spam, either; wasn't that just 4hundred running the other team over with double-com? Just because a bunch of Defenders get built doesn't mean necessarily that they characterised the sum direction of the game.

This isn't an excellent map for 1v1 and probably doesn't rate inclusion in a list of "featured" maps but it's certainly good enough to be "supported", whenever that distinction is implemented. Most of the 1v1s I remember on this map were a bit curbstompy but mostly by virtue of the player matchups.
+0 / -0


USrankFealthas
2 years ago
Defender or no defender, it is trivial for a conscious life form of any sort to defend histheir half of the map. There is no fighting over mexes, no raiding. There is only unit counters. This removes a part of zerok, that is the expansion/raiding game. Even if there was no static defence, you can just use radar and spread your units in a line.
+1 / -0


AUrankAquanim
2 years ago
USrankFealthas - that has not been my universal experience of this map in 1v1 (I think you can be aggressive early, depending on factory matchup) but I agree that this map tends that way more than most.
+0 / -0


PLrankAdminSprung
2 years ago
quote:
"supported", whenever that distinction is implemented

Already exists
+0 / -0


AUrankAquanim
2 years ago
Implemented perhaps a poor choice of words. There's still a lot of pretty meh maps featured and I don't know of a way to !map for only featured maps or alternatively for featured + supported maps.
+0 / -0

USrankAdminJasper
2 years ago
removed 1vs1 tag
+2 / -0



EErankAdminAnarchid
2 years ago
(edited 2 years ago)

Does it make less sense in 1v1 than in 2v2? 0_o It's a rush and reclaim grab in both cases.

Downgrade to supported instead? It's not super pretty or super fun at any team size, i think.
+1 / -0
Page of 2 (24 records)
Back to List