Spring RTS Engine

I've made another map(s). It was intended to be 3v3+, but proved fun in 2v2 on an alternate version.

Edit : A third version is out, check the end of the post.

First version is Trench_v2 (v1 is outdated)
http://spring.jobjol.nl/show_file.php?id=1450
West vs East in 3v3 and more.

Alternate version is Trench_Linked
http://spring.jobjol.nl/show_file.php?id=1451
South vs North in 2v2, or West vs East in 3v3 and more.



Trench_v2 is split in two by a middle trench (hence the name).
The metal is denser near the trench, so you'll want to get close.
There are two 'platforms' in the middle with boosted metal, but also boosted exposition.
The trench is thin, so It will be an arty/turret war arround the trench (hence the ...doh!) ... The map being lenghty, its hard to cover the whole line, so many invasion opportunities exists (early air drop for outposts, spiders-like units, offensive airdrop & air bombing).
So its West vs East with 3v3 or more.

Trench_Linked is basically the same, but the platforms are now 'isles' connected to the two sides so ground unit can cross. This version can still be played 3v3 on West vs East, but it can be played 2v2 too, in a North vs South game.

I encourage you to try this (those) maps, couldnt actually try a 3v3 & more game, but the 2v2 was fun.

If you test this map, please leave comments here :D
(and by the way think about donating to JJ's \o/ his site is very usefull to the community...)

Screenies :

















llamadeus's way to invade the enemy by starting in the trench :D


=============================================

And now for the third alternative version : Trench_Linked_WE
Its basically Trench_WE, improved to work with West vs East games.
Larger on the sides, playground is vertically shorter except that I choosed not to actually shrink the map and let two desert zones on north and south, so the kids can play there
Also the sand is somewhat lighter. Very important to say.

The map :


The maplink :
http://spring.jobjol.nl/show_file.php?id=1459

Theres some metal on the west and east ends so it makes starting there possible.

Rule #1 when posting a map: post pictures

There are images !
You just have to give it some time to load.
(Or some time for me to edit the post and actually add images, which is EXACTLY the same).

Rule #2 when posting a map: dont just post a pic of the texture map, post an ingame screenshot

Several preferably.

Hey who do you think I am ! I was obvioulsy about to post the screenies !

Its just that my comp is a little slow (altough its a commodore 64 !) so it took some time to render the screenchots.
The screeenshots ready,Ihad to upload them with my brand new 300bps modem, so it took some more time.

Here they are now :D



(Im soooo good at making excuses ... I love me.)

Nice screens. Looks nice.

Thanks.

New version available : Trench_Linked_WE.
See first (updated) post. ^___^

Hi,any chance to see the third version get another version where the 2 bridges connect completly and not just by small passes on each side.

Im not fond of that idea, that would reduce the fight to controling the bridge. I explain :

Here the 'isles' are hard to take :
The small bridges means you cant just come with loads of units to overwhelm the defense. You have to weaken the defenses of the isle, to allow your units to get on it, then you have to fight again to allow your units actually getting off the 'isle' on the other side.
So when playing, even if you lose the 'isle' control, you can stil attemp to block the isle's exit. Plus, the difficulty of the 'isles' battleground can encourage players to think of 'specials strategies', like using airdrops, emp bombers, trying to set a base on the enemy side, using arty and so on.

If that was a simple wide bridge, ground fight would be far more easy, and there would not be much steps in the battle : when you pass the bridge with mass units, you win. The simplicity of that would make the map a battle for the bridge and not a trench fight, thus greatly reducing the interest of other aforementioned 'special strategies'.

However if there's more demand for a 'bridge' version, I can still do it but as a level-designer I would find that so interesting.

THebridge will be a porc/turret spam anyway question is how comfterble it wil be to move units on it...will you have to tare your hair outto get a few units across or they wil move smoothly.

The small bridges allow units to go through, but will regulate massive unit groups, thus making the mass unit attack not a very effective strategy.

The point of this level design is to have fights that differs from mass defense overrun.

The first versions of the map (v1 and v2) are actually pure trench fight, with no bridges. This being a little too extreme to attract players, the 'linked' version was made.

A wide, comfy bridge to allow big group of units to go through the trench would just be going against the concept of this map. Therefore, no.

The best part about this map, and the reason why I think it's set apart from other maps before it is how the initial gameplay [assuming top v bottom], is almost completely divided into two halves. Players must take their half first, before attempting to conquer the other side. I like this mechanic, it's very interesting. The option of starting in the gutter is also unique, give you some more options with the tradeoff of good early mex access.