The Scorched Ashes
Rank 989 out of 2,924 in StarCraft 2
This map is part of the The Scorched Ashes project.
A newer version of this map, The Scorched Ashes, is available.
About
Enjoy this map in a 1v1 or 2v2 battle set back on Char. Feel free to ask anything related to map and such. Updated since the last version with more textures to look more realistic. Final version of map is this or if not the next one.
UPDATE #4
Change Log
-slight improvements on the visual
-fixed a few bugs which i found accidentally
-few new cracks near the center of map
Meta
- Map Style:
- Melee
- Categories:
- AI Mods Strategy
- Author:
- Zakusho 3
- Filename:
- Scorched ashes.SC2Map
- Project Page:
- The Scorched Ashes
- Type:
- StarCraft 2 Map
- Size:
- 936.9 KB
- Overall Rating:
-
4 / 5 (6 votes, ranked #178) - Tags:
- Favorites:
- 1
- Downloads (Total):
- 1,428
- Downloads (Daily):
- n/a
- Submitted By:
- Zakusho 3
- Discovered On:
- Aug. 10, 2010
Share Map
- JavaScript Widget:
- Direct Link:
Download Map
Install automatically with NIBBLER
Install automatically with NIBBLER
Rating
- Opinion:
6 votes considered -
Good
- Terrain:
- Units:
- Sound:
- Replay Value:
Your Rating
Recent Ratings
Achievements
No badges or achievements yet.
Team Information
None
- Neutral (Neutral)
- Player 1 (Human)
- Player 2 (Human)
- Player 3 (Human)
- Player 4 (Human)
- Hostile (Hostile)
User Comments
Support Nibbits by linking to us:
The map is boring and open. The "natural" and "main" areas are just too open to any sort of harass. There are few places that offer a strategic advantage and the pathing is awful if the players spawn on the same side of the map. The pathing leads to a statemate position since an attack by either side will allow the other side to do a massive counter attack which leads to either turtle play or all-ins. The third is too far away to reasonably be considered a third and the map is just too large in general.
Is a cool map.. i like it :)
i do not see how the boundaries actually do something bad to the current position... if i put starting locations and resources a bit more further from boundaries it would not make an impact and in fact it is really good this way in my opinion(near the boundaries you could make depots/pylons). but I know what you mean... you mean you want some space for example if you would be in SL001 you would want to build in your upper part some of your bases buildings but think of it this way: if i put lets say SL001 down like 123 / 108 while now it is at 123 / 115 it would mean that your base would be much closer to the enemy and the map size is not really that big for me to simply do it... i really think that it would ruin the play and the way it is now i feel it's perfect. I do not know how you like positioning your buildings but I personally put them so that I got space for production ones and those that research or add some additional pop to pop cap to be very close since they do not make units that can get blocked.
Ok, it's better now. But I dld the map, and the map boundries ar in the way a little bit... just press Ctrl + Shift + H to show the outer red section. At that section, units and buildings can NOT be placed. 1 starting location is a little bit in that section, so that players command center or hatchery or whatever will be moved at the start. So it will be further away from the minerals then other players... and the player has less space to build. That is all.
I will be uploading my maps in a week, so be sure to look out for them. The things I do now is constantly improving, playtesting, and adding some detail to the maps. I am in the contest, but I still tell people how to improve.
hmmm depends what you exactly refer to. if you are referring to the fact that i added lava cracks and the "hole" in center o map then my reply to that would be that it was suggested and actually i think it is preety cool where it stands and it can be a very nice obstacle which would force players to be more accurate with their moves. i believe you also probably refer to the sudden changes between the 1st version and the next ones in which there were no cracks and stuff like that at all but without them it would look rather weird and uncomplete
Looks like an interesting concept, but the terrain changes are a bit too sharp.
here you are the fixed starting locations i got them as close as possible to starting location for each base you can verify in editor that it is as close as it can and yes i know at starting location 004 that mineral under the SL004 seems closer than the others but it is same distance
it is not supposed to be symmetrical ... anyway i got a bit of a problem with my pc and i will upload it tomorrow with "fixed" starting locations...
EDIT: oh ye... and I think you guys do not get it with the map... it is supposed to be a dead part of the planet Char... and I really hate symmetrical starting locations (including resources) because it does not seem real... on the battlefield if you would actually be like in this game and you would need well not necessary minerals and gas but things that replace these resources.. you actually think you would find symmetrical resources positioning and bases? it is like a 1 in a million chance to occur... and the way i will fix the starting locations is by putting them close to resources in equal way(which i did already and tomorrow will be uploaded)
unbalanced, mostly because of starting locations but it's also not symmetrical either
Hmmm never had been suggested anything about starting locations. Well I'll try to find a better spot for each then but can you be more precise about advantages on their current positioning? Also the details of map may seem rather missing but it is meant after all to be a deserted place, destroyed by the zerg consumed...
It's just that... I've seen better. Sorry man :/
Just put more into detail, and make the starting locations almost the same, because some players have an advantage. Still, nice try.
I am currently working on a new map however no actual information about it stay tuned when it appears(somewhere between 13-15 aug)
Sweet! I will Check it out. Peace
NOTES: -do not rate if your not even trying the map
-do not be a bot such as dosmode seems to be
-when you rate, rate it for how much effort the author put on the map and how good it looks not for the fact that you are better and should rate 1/5 cause you think only you deserve 3/5 / 4/5 / 5/5...
-i would appreciate a valid comment with arguments why you actually rated my map 1/5 / 2/5 / 3/5 / 4/5 / 5/5... till now i have seen kinda 3 people rating without really putting up a reason and also if you are to rate it 1/5 or 2/5 it is necessary to tell the author what to improve... (2/5 means needs improving and 1/5 terrible which means it needs alot of improving so it should be clear that you should actually say trough pm or comment what you think it really lacks and makes it a terrible map)