• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!

[4] City Charge 1.1

This bundle is marked as useful / simple. Simplicity is bliss, low effort and/or may contain minor bugs.
City Charge


Players: 4
Goldmines: 8
Version: 1.1
Playable area: 64 x 96
Suggested modes: 2 v 2
Tileset: Cityscape

Description: Defend your city, or attack it to claim victory over the battlefield!

Notes from me: My third map, with the tileset cityscape, adding some fine ammount of monsters with low chances of dropping items. If you get lucky they all might drop something!

Version 1.1
-Added player numbers in name
-Added monsters to player spawns


196985-albums4140-picture39067.jpg
Contents

[4] City Charge 1.1 (Map)

Reviews
20:32, 28th Dec 2010 ap0calypse: Rejected
Level 31
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
3,155
even though melee map is the easiest genre map to be done, i strongly recommend not to make them in haste as it would resulted into negligence over a few basic melee genre rules.

One of the obvious case for this map was not placing an creep to guard a gold mine with starting location. All gold mine must be protected including gold mine with player starting location. The only exception for gold mine with player starting location doesn't need any protection was for 1 versus 1 map.
 
Level 31
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
3,155
City Charge is a melee genre map by Eldubs. To begin with, the description of this map was absolutely lacking and unappealing despite it follow the minimum requirement of rules.

Next comes the terrain, the way the tiles variation was used and set; along with the way the destructible/doodad was placed show an piece of amateurs work. For example, the grassfield on the city was lacking (tiles variation) and destructible/doodad such as flower to enchances the scenery.

Next comes the creep, the creep was poorly place (An example would be tavern where an massive creep was placed. Tavern are the only structure in melee map that should not guarded unless you are planning to make an melee map genre with a few exception of melee genre rules) and have inbalance drop (Which I don't think it was necessarily to be explain as everyone who play the map would understand it perfectly well).

Gold resources was also another issues, it barely have 12,500 gold which make it isn't subtle for a 4 player match (Especially FFA).

Overall, the quality of this map was extremely lacking (2/5) and was closed to unacceptable (1/5). If this map was submitted during the past, it might possibly approve/accepted into database as the quality control of map submission in the past was much lenient. However, the quality control was much stricter now which I don't think the quality meet the min requirement standard of hiveworkshop.

Thus, I recommend the author to revise melee map (particularly blizzard melee map) to get an much better visual of how a melee map should be. My vote is 1/5 (Unacceptable) and vote for reject.
 
Level 15
Joined
Sep 17, 2010
Messages
1,449
Septimus thank you for the good review! As you told in the review a amateur created the map. That is true i am a amateur, but people learn from mistakes. I will do my best and try to improve this map as much as possible. I respect your rate and dont want to try to change your mind. But i have a reguest for you! Could you please make a good review for this map please? Would mean much to me as that is my best work.

Fine regards
Eldubs
 
Top