| 1 |
It's not water, on Zed. It's instagib.
|
1 |
It's not water, on Zed. It's instagib.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
My 2c:
|
3 |
My 2c:
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
1) Availability. A good ZK map allows for dynamic games with as much factories viable as possible. This qualifies both geyser and IOG on the same premise, but doesn't qualify Zed or Zion. Coagulation was an attempt at this but failed because vehicles/tanks are not really viable on Coag.
|
5 |
1) Availability. A good ZK map allows for dynamic games with as much factories viable as possible. This qualifies both geyser and IOG on the same premise, but doesn't qualify Zed or Zion. Coagulation was an attempt at this but failed because vehicles/tanks are not really viable on Coag.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
2) Openness. A good map should not be uniformly covered in mexes and have too few chokepoints, because ZK has cheap and effective static defenses. Both of the mentioned criteria (having narrow chokes; having uniform mex layout) make porc more viable than mobiles too often. Ravaged offers a nice balance between openness and chokepoints, in no small part because of how mexes are arranged in clusters.
|
7 |
2) Openness. A good map should not be uniformly covered in mexes and have too few chokepoints, because ZK has cheap and effective static defenses. Both of the mentioned criteria (having narrow chokes; having uniform mex layout) make porc more viable than mobiles too often. Ravaged offers a nice balance between openness and chokepoints, in no small part because of how mexes are arranged in clusters.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
3) Visibility. The map's visual language should make gameplay properties of terrain visible at a glance. Ideally, this language should be shared for all maps, but that requires coordination, dedication, and/or limits artistic freedom of mappers.
|
9 |
3) Visibility. The map's visual language should make gameplay properties of terrain visible at a glance. Ideally, this language should be shared for all maps, but that requires coordination, dedication, and/or limits artistic freedom of mappers.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
4) Aesthetics. As long as eye candy doesn't conflict with any of the above three, i want *all* the eye candy.
|
11 |
4) Aesthetics. As long as eye candy doesn't conflict with any of the above three, i want *all* the eye candy.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
5)
Bonus
point:
being
mixed.
This
kind
of
falls
under
Availability,
but
even
when
map
is
not
entirely
mixed
(
e.
g.
doesn't
allow
ships
or
have
contigious
water
bodies)
,
having
areas
which
give
small
or
large
benefits
to
hovers
and
amphs
is
nice.
Ideally,
i
want
ZK
to
move
from
"open
sea
vs
dry
land"
dichotomy
and
have
[b]all[/b]
maps
to
have
at
least
some
water;
ships
moving
from
open-sea
tanks
into
shore
support
/
limited-passability-high-power
role
(
like
trains,
but
with
water)
,
and
to
be
built
around
engaging
with
ground
units.
|
13 |
5)
Bonus
point:
being
mixed.
This
kind
of
falls
under
Availability,
but
even
when
map
is
not
entirely
mixed
(
e.
g.
doesn't
allow
ships
or
have
contigious
water
bodies)
,
having
areas
which
give
small
or
large
benefits
to
hovers
and
amphs
is
nice.
|
|
|
14 |
\n
|
|
|
15 |
Ideally, i want ZK to move from "open sea vs dry land" schiso split, and to have [b]all[/b] maps have at least some water; with ships moving from open-sea tanks into shore support / limited-passability-high-power role (like trains, but with water), and to be built around engaging with ground units.
|
Good ZK Maps