How could you improve the maps without changing them?


(Raviolay) #1

Sounds odd I know but after partaking in a turn off ragefest/snoozefest 16 player game with wonky performance. Something became very simple became apparent, something that has been said over and over again. Lower the player count & bring back the grenades, I really should not have to point why I feel this is the case.

However… grenades are not just for killing, they are very useful in making entrenched players move out of that position they are hogging. The argument that one mercenary grenades as a special is moronic argument, as one, we are limited to a choice of three. You talk of making the game more accessible (remove class objectives), then take away a core tool preventing most players. From actively attacking or contributing with some area denial. Also given how one mercenary with grenades is the only one unable to lift his weapon to shoot with some semblance accuracy. Is yet another odd choice gone down this “new” direction this game is getting Team Fortress like.

Scout could very well be Proxy.
Heavy could very well be Rhino.
Demoman could very well be Nader.
Sniper could very well be Vassili
Enginner could very well be Bushwhacker.

I digress however, lowering the player count makes the maps bearable as the poor design is not so noticeable. The no grenades re jigging only makes the maps worse as the coke points become even more akin to a WW1 trench war. At 16 players it makes me even more unwilling go over the top, no potato mashers to break the deadlock. I still have yet to see some smoke also why is this?


(Glottis-3D) #2

Nades are realy needed, so this is deffinitely +1.

And about maps… They need to be changed. The thing is… SD has this unstopable desire to have 10-15 maps. So they do not change the map, so IT PLAYS well, they chop it, so IT BECOMES SHORT. no matter the actual feel and flaw of the map. They think prbbly that later they will fix the map, when it is short. But you dont do that - that is not how maps are build - the great ones, i mean. THe deleted Church(WChapel) and Hach(Waterloo) objects are the examples. potentially great objectives. just gone.
meh.


(potty200) #3

Just gunna throw this out there but - 30 second spawn time for defence and 20 for attack. This would fix a lot of issues and choke points on maps.


(prophett) #4

I think this would help, but the major flaw is the linear design and total lack of choice.


(Raviolay) #5

[QUOTE=krokodealer;485851]Nades are realy needed, so this is deffinitely +1.

And about maps… They need to be changed. The thing is… SD has this unstopable desire to have 10-15 maps. So they do not change the map, so IT PLAYS well, they chop it, so IT BECOMES SHORT. no matter the actual feel and flaw of the map. They think prbbly that later they will fix the map, when it is short. But you dont do that - that is not how maps are build - the great ones, i mean. THe deleted Church(WChapel) and Hach(Waterloo) objects are the examples. potentially great objectives. just gone.
meh.[/QUOTE]

Got to agree with this, they also made Whitechapel’s lift objective even more uninteresting by removing the hacking, and then scraped the half decent doc run at the end. The crap bit on that map is the start, if you are going to cut stuff that bit is what I would cut & given how pointless engineers are have the EV fixed from the get go. Re-introduce the two doc runs & give us back the hacking I say they had a semblance of fun!


(slanir) #6

Agree! And that’s my biggest concern for the future of this game. The maps are too linear which reduces the amount of tactical posibilities for both sides. It’s like a rail-shooter.


(tokamak) #7

W:ET and ETQW had incredibly versatile maps yet the battle was always focussed. Rather than letting the geometry dictate the matches the fights were mostly fought over (secondary) objectives and forward spawns.

Secondary objectives and forward spawns are the team’s lifeline. They give tactical security to defenders and momentum to attackers. The reason why the ET maps could be so ‘open’ was because the fw spawns and objectives were vital. Players could swarm across all over the place if they wanted. However, unless the detour was worth the pay-off it was usually a bad idea to stray too far to the progress you worked for during the match. You worked towards capturing points in the map, inching closer to whatever you were trying to achieve. Straying too far would give the risk of losing it all. Some maps could even roll back all the progress you made up towards the final objective if you weren’t careful.

Extraction doesn’t have this. Or at least, it seems to be a bit of an afterthought. However, lacking these secondary points means that you’re completely reliant on letting map design carry all the balance. That’s what eventually results in a bunch of corridors with a scarce amount of alternate routes.

Hind-sight is easy of course but it feels like giving these ‘lifeline’ objectives a lower priority in development has stunted the way the earliest maps could develop into something interesting.

Now, secondary, geometrical objectives like walls and bridges and tunnels etc are expensive to implement. Forward spawns are not. We need to start playing around with forward spawns. Once they start impacting the flow of maps it probably becomes much clearer to see where maps need to be changed and extra routes can be added.

See the forward spawns as nodes from which developers can expand maps from in a sensible way.


(k0k0nat) #8

Not with the current maps. Waterloo would be done in 2 minutes.


(potty200) #9

Bring back the milk jugs + spawn time suggestion = a solid map


(Rex) #10

[QUOTE=Raviolay;485850]Sounds odd I know but after partaking in a turn off ragefest/snoozefest 16 player game with wonky performance. Something became very simple became apparent, something that has been said over and over again. Lower the player count & bring back the grenades, I really should not have to point why I feel this is the case.

However… grenades are not just for killing, they are very useful in making entrenched players move out of that position they are hogging. The argument that one mercenary grenades as a special is moronic argument, as one, we are limited to a choice of three. You talk of making the game more accessible (remove class objectives), then take away a core tool preventing most players. From actively attacking or contributing with some area denial. Also given how one mercenary with grenades is the only one unable to lift his weapon to shoot with some semblance accuracy. Is yet another odd choice gone down this “new” direction this game is getting Team Fortress like.

Scout could very well be Proxy.
Heavy could very well be Rhino.
Demoman could very well be Nader.
Sniper could very well be Vassili
Enginner could very well be Bushwhacker.

I digress however, lowering the player count makes the maps bearable as the poor design is not so noticeable. The no grenades re jigging only makes the maps worse as the coke points become even more akin to a WW1 trench war. At 16 players it makes me even more unwilling go over the top, no potato mashers to break the deadlock. I still have yet to see some smoke also why is this?[/QUOTE]

To answer the titles question: It’s not possible.
Lowering the player count, like you suggested, only fixes the symptoms but not the source of the problem.

Yes, nades really need to come back.

[QUOTE=krokodealer;485851]
And about maps… They need to be changed. The thing is… SD has this unstopable desire to have 10-15 maps. So they do not change the map, so IT PLAYS well, they chop it, so IT BECOMES SHORT. no matter the actual feel and flaw of the map. They think prbbly that later they will fix the map, when it is short. But you dont do that - that is not how maps are build - the great ones, i mean. THe deleted Church(WChapel) and Hach(Waterloo) objects are the examples. potentially great objectives. just gone.
meh.[/QUOTE]

Some months ago I opened a thread in the inner forum with the title “Drop the support for the first maps” (LB, WC, Waterloo), because no matter how many changes they will make there these 3 maps will never be a blast. They have been altered so many times already and still no one is happy about them, so why should SD waste even more time? I also don’t understand why so many people can’t get over them. The first maps were built without the gameplay, as we know it today, being established so obviously they don’t fit.
SDs focus should be all on the new maps, with forward spawns, side routes and secondary objectives worth fighting for. I rather play one good map than 3 maps which are playable to a certain point, but no fun.
Guys, we are running out of time if you haven’t noticed yet…

This won’t work, as we have different distances for both attackers and defenders to the objective depending on the stage. Like I already said somewhen there needs to be a flexible spawn system (with different spawn times) dependent on each objective.


(rookie1) #11

[QUOTE=Rex;485870]…Some months ago I opened a thread in the inner forum with the title “Drop the support for the first maps” (LB, WC, Waterloo), because no matter how many changes they will make there these 3 maps will never be a blast. They have been altered so many times already and still no one is happy about them, so why should SD waste even more time? I also don’t understand why so many people can’t get over them. The first maps were built without the gameplay, as we know it today, being established so obviously they don’t fit.
SDs focus should be all on the new maps, with forward spawns, side routes and secondary objectives worth fighting for. I rather play one good map than 3 maps which are playable to a certain point, but no fun.
Guys, we are running out of time if you haven’t noticed yet…[/QUOTE]
Agreed
imo All focus should go on A new map to be finalize asap
and fix trainyard to Camden like (longer map)

for the rest it can wait
Waterloo and LB will need more attention later
WC: should be quick fix
Like said these were the first maps done for showing the game on a previous vision ,
Now that has changed these maps doesnt fit very well the way it was originaly done .
But still they were/are good for testing many things.
In the end these original maps could stay in the rotation after tweaking them until a good result .


(Humate) #12

A multi-kill friendly combat system, with a good spawn system will generally do wonders for area control.

etqw did it best


(Protekt1) #13

Should’ve saw this coming. Fix map design by allowing cooked grenades to win the day… no.

If grenades can’t be cooked, then at least I am more open to that. Still, fixing poor map design should be done by fixing the maps. All the future maps are designed with the current character system in mind, I assume.


(prophett) #14

Make the doc run on London bridge a single obj, longer run toward the end of the map.


(Raviolay) #15

[QUOTE=Protekt1;485884]Should’ve saw this coming. Fix map design by allowing cooked grenades to win the day… no.

If grenades can’t be cooked, then at least I am more open to that. Still, fixing poor map design should be done by fixing the maps. All the future maps are designed with the current character system in mind, I assume.[/QUOTE]

In no way could this be construed that grenades will “fix” the map design. However these first maps were originally played with grenades as a staple kit across all classes/characters. The maps while still bad, played a lot better than they do now rather than pure stalemate games I been in for a very short time I might add. The gunplay feels off even for this game with this current patch and busy areas of the map somehow manage to perform worse than ever before.

As for cooked grenades I am not a fan of it, as for one I have always felt that they take too long to cook in this game. That and I am also more of a fan of the one bounce and detonate on second bounce nade, unless you hit a player square on with it.


(Protekt1) #16

Fair enough. I just am so bored of grenades being powerful in fps. My favorite patch so far was when they removed them from every character except the one lol… I don’t mind them having grenades just I like the variety like Molotovs much more.


(shaftz0r) #17

ive said this a few times now. make it a doc run to the ev, and have the map end on a short ev escort around that last corner


(attack) #18

thgis wouldnt improve the map, because the defender have still no sspawn which does it possible to rly get the obj back.
this is why i would prefer a explosiv objective or an hackable


(Raviolay) #19

Don’t get me wrong I am not a major fan of grenades myself, however when you have a set of developers so obsessed the idea that choke points make a good map, no nades is a bad choice. I can’t remember if it was Smooth who commented that Titanfalls maps while open don’t have choke point’s, and then made that out to be a bad thing somehow. What he described was the best argument for a map design, albeit he thought it was the worst thing ever from his post.

(ps: I would love to find that post out).


(shaftz0r) #20

[QUOTE=attack;485901]thgis wouldnt improve the map, because the defender have still no sspawn which does it possible to rly get the obj back.
this is why i would prefer a explosiv objective or an hackable[/QUOTE]

lolwut? defenders spawn right next to garage. getting the obj back isnt really the point. thats done by pushing forward when they grab it, not in hindsight on a respawn. def can go up stairs and spam the ev, so the map isnt a complete loss just because the obj got delivered. it adds an element of decision. chase docs, or give up and setup a defense on the bridge