Bridge - First Drug objective too hard to defend

(PinkFrog) #1

Over several weeks of playing Bridge on casual servers I came to the conclusion that I think defending the first drug capture is very hard for the defending team.

This is obviously a case of learning the map etc. So, it’s not a bug.
I just feel, that it is really hard to switch from trying to damage the EV or keep them from repairing it to back to gather a big enough group of players in the lab to defend against players rushing in from potentially 3 sides.

I’m not sure what to here. Maybe let the drugs spawn after about 10 seconds after the explosion?

(Szakalot) #2

just slow down the EV salvo

(Mustang) #3

Hell no, I hate this artificial hand-holding, players just need to learn to recognise when to fallback, that said bridge-alt dawg!

(dlul) #4

It’s almost impossible to get there if the team defends properly, so maybe it’s not so bad to get one easily if the defenders fail to fall back at the right time

(titan) #5

#bringbackalt

(Volcano) #6

is bridge alt just the original London map if so the tank still needs to fire from the bridge rather than taking it down the s-bend

(prophett) #7

#bringbackalt

(Glottis-3D) #8

#bringbackalt

(NeroKirbus) #9

From my understanding bridge alt has the delivery point in a different spot. I’m not sure where; I would like to see the exact placement of it.

(Glottis-3D) #10

attackers POV:

The point was behind th MG nest building further to the right.
and there was no MG building afair.

(NeroKirbus) #11

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;532289]attackers POV:

The point was behind th MG nest building further to the right.
and there was no MG building afair.[/QUOTE]

I assumed it was that spot, since it is closer to bank on W:ET. Makes much more sense that way. So they got rid of the MG building? What did they do with the alleyway + building to the right of the MG building? Is the geometry completely different than what it is now?

I would love to see this map come back, I remember it was up for a short period of time in alpha/closed beta but I never got around to playing it.

(Glottis-3D) #12

[QUOTE=NeroKirbus;532290]I assumed it was that spot, since it is closer to bank on W:ET. Makes much more sense that way. So they got rid of the MG building? What did they do with the alleyway + building to the right of the MG building? Is the geometry completely different than what it is now?

I would love to see this map come back, I remember it was up for a short period of time in alpha/closed beta but I never got around to playing it.[/QUOTE]

yep, white boxes all the way, compeletely different layout.
with differrent routes of different safety for a delivery guy. and defenders could rush the delivery point or intercept the runner.

(Szakalot) #13

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;532291]yep, white boxes all the way, compeletely different layout.
with differrent routes of different safety for a delivery guy. and defenders could rush the delivery point or intercept the runner.[/QUOTE]

just link the video on a game in bridge alt, that gives a sense of the map better than any descriptions here

(Glottis-3D) #14

i played it on old PC without shadow-play =(

(montheponies) #15

Selectable spawns would help though. Also could allow the defense into the building before the EV has blown the front gate.

Agreed that the alternative location for the delivery was better…

(Mustang) #16

Exactly!

I was going to mention this but somehow came to the realisation that it does make sense for players not to be allowed into the building before the objective was active, however I hadn’t thought far enough to figure out that I was only considering it from an attackers perspective, it totally makes sense to allow defenders access.

Previously this done with selectable spawns, team only doors, and map design. Now it’s either done with defender friendly map design, which is great, or non-defender friendly map design, which isn’t great. I don’t mind the change in philosophy, but it puts a lot more emphasis on getting the map design right.

Some examples of good transitions between objectives and map designs:

  • Trainyard 2nd-3rd (blocker carriage to helicopter)
  • Bridge 1st-2nd (EV repair to escort/barrier)
  • Underground 1st (defenders have easy access from a doorless entrance)

Some examples of bad transitions between objectives and map designs:

  • Trainyard 1st-2nd (can’t get to blocker carriage before gates open)
  • Bridge 2nd-3rd (no defenders entrance to the GH building)
  • Underground 1st-2nd (can’t fallback until gas has cleared)
(BioSnark) #17

you can also get blown up if you’re near the building when the missiles hit. not well thought out.

(AssortedStuff) #18

Another problem with the last objective (as Defence) are the delayed audio announcements.
By the time it is announced “They’ve got the objective” it really means they’re already getting to the container (if no Defence is stopping the carrier).
Those announcements need fixed.

(Szakalot) #19

[QUOTE=AssortedStuff;532744]Another problem with the last objective (as Defence) are the delayed audio announcements.
By the time it is announced “They’ve got the objective” it really means they’re already getting to the container (if no Defence is stopping the carrier).
Those announcements need fixed.[/QUOTE]

thats just part of the bigger ‘audio lag’ problem.