Do Splash Damage even take feedback serious? It would not seem that way.


(Tormentaius) #1

Hello everyone.

The Following has been sent to Splashdamage’s Community Manager on the 27’th of March 2016, and to their Facebook Fan/community page on 8’th of March 2016. No replies or written confirmation from Splash Damage or SD Community Manager. The following is an in-depth analysis of the game - feedback for the game with suggestions on how to fix certain issues. I’d also like to mention that the reason I’m now posting this here is to get some eyes on my analysis & feedback, and hopefully a dev or at least the community manager will see this. Currently I feel SD isn’t taking the feedback they get serious, because certain issues are still unadressed and breaks the game in so many ways.

Constructive feedback is encouraged and negative comments ignored!

So here is the message that was sent:

"Hello to the devs at Splash Damage.

First, I want to tell you that I’m experienced game tester and developer and after playing your game Dirty Bomb, I can be considered a beta tester for that particular game. I take that role seriously and leave you with feedback, suggestions how to fix certain issues. However its gotten to a point where just leaving feedback isn’t enough as I can see various issue have been left unaddressed for unknown reasons. Also to to mention here, that went from my initial feedback vote of 8 down to 1, as the feedback I left didn’t do anything, and my overall experience of the game kept getting worse and worse, because of several things mentioned later in this email.

I have a sincere concern for your game Dirty Bomb and in a way I’m trying to protect my investment of time and money spent on the game, but also to raise the quality and potential for the game. Its a fun game that quickly can be ruined because certain issues have not been addressed and rectified. I have a few issues with the game that you seriously need to acknowledge as issues with your game and address them as quick as possible. The game has some inherent issues because of the game’s unique design.

1/ Lack of Spawnprotection This is something that the game is severely lacking and is being exploited to the fullest in many games, ranked included. This ruins the experience and fun of the game. But not only that, it makes the game pointless because the whole focus of the defending/attacking team shifts to how they can most efficiently spawncamp, spawnkill, create a spawn-rape fest OR how to avoid it. The focus should be around the objectives and not about spawn-raping the other team or how defend against it or try to break out of it. As I mentioned this happens also in ranked. The game is not in any way fun when this happens and it complete ruins the experience of playing the game. Then you have to ask, why does this happen and how can this be prevented. Its really simple, the reason it happens is much like when trolls troll, because they can get way with it and NO ONE is stopping them. And could also raise the questions if those people exhibiting this kind of behavior in the game are internet trolls. But simply put, this happens because you let it happen because you’ve not implemented any form of spawnprotection, nor are the spawnzones inaccessible, not possible to be attacked, etc. This is why it happens because you have made it possible by not implementing spawnprotection, not even in its most common and rudimentary form.

As a result you will lose many potential customers and players who enjoy ranked play. I can already say alot of clans/competitive groups of players will steer clear of the game until this is rectified. And overall it lowers the quality of the game, I’m sure you’re not really interested in delivering a game that is low quality when considering titles you’ve already released. I’m also sure on that you’re interested in actually creating a game people find to be a fun experience. So you really need to step up and rectify this by implementing spawn protection, be more aware in your map design so spawnzones aren’t accessible to the enemy team, this also count towards spawn exits. Another way to prevent spawnkilling is to actually directly penalize the player. In every competitive first person shooter I know, spawnkilling is considered an act of cheating and clearly shows the player lack an understanding of what good sportmanship and fair play is.

2/ Core Mechanics + Core Game Modes + Gameplay + Uneven Teams Reinforcement timers and incapacitation - those seriously need to be addressed. The reinforcement timers are way too long, especially when playing with a low count of players on both teams. Incapacitation is fine, however a player should be able to revive himself, this doesn’t make the medic / defibrilator ability useless. And to balance this you could also put a bleed effect on the incapacitated player after a while so he/she has to try and get back to remove the bleed effect so that you can’t exploit being incapacitated. What this will do is that it will force the players to actually to attempt exectuting the incapacitated opponent in order to prevent them from getting back up - and here is why medics defibrilator ability isn’t useless, it will still get the incapacitated players back up fast - faster than what the incapacitated would’ve been able to in any case. This means that the defib ability saves precious time and help get the teams fighting numbers back up - which is the important aspect of it. Execution mode seem much like a ripoff from Counterstrike’s defuse maps. Try implementing others like Capture The Flag, Team Deathmatch, Last Man Standing, King of the Hill, Seize Ground - there many game modes that could be successfully implemented.

A very important aspect that very often can ruin the fun for the players with the fewest players on their team. Naturally there isn’t much you can do about disconnects, but there is a lot you can do about starting fair game by making sure the game doesn’t start until the lobby is full, but can be force started by calling a vote where ALL vote yes to starting. This is especially true in stopwatch mode, where the attacker usually ends up being only one player if there is only three players in the game, and I can say its almost impossible to win against two players while you have to attack/push the objective forward, while also having a long reinforcement timer. Take the map Chapel as an example - you have to be close to the EV to push the objective, but you also have to repair it when its disabled - which takes quite some time if you’re not playing an objective specialist, even if so it takes less time to disable it than it takes to repair it. So when the attacker was 1 player against 2 players and now it switches, now guess what happens - that player gets steamrolled most likely as one can safely push the objective while being protected, kept alive, etc.

3/ Map design. Overall you’ve created some interesting maps, but all share the common issues. All spawnzones can be access, which they should not be able to be. A spawnzone should be inaccessible to the opposing team and not possible to be attacked in. Poor spawn exits where you can be attacked all angles and basically can become a kill-fest because the opposing team camp right outside, mine it, put turrets up, etc. Basically preventing the team from effectively leaving the spawn-area to engage the enemy team and focus on completing the objectives. Certain points can severely be exploited by abilities, like Proxy’s mines, Kira Orbital Laser and so forth, but the first mentioned is one of those that are most often being exploited, because mines can be placed on the map in blind angles - meaning you can’t directly shoot them to set them off. So map definitely need to be reworked/tweaked to fix issues with them.

4/ Abilities - Balancing - Cooldowns Various abilities are interesting but way too powerful and can’t just be balanced by increasing the cooldown. For instance Kira’s Orbital Laser is way to powerful. Let’s analyze it: It penetrates ceilings and floors, it pretty much insta-kills anyone it touches, its contrallable and it can deny the players the objective and if timed correctly it can pretty much deny the opposing team access to the objective - ensuring a win! But also another point I think is important to raise here, mercs don’t have an equal amount of abilities and most don’t even compare in effectiveness, usefulness and power, where some are very circumstancial. - For instance the Medic Phoenix is seriously overpowered as a medic - it’s the ONLY merc with THREE abilities, it’s the only merc that get around the inbuilt mechanic of being incapacitated, its the only merc that can heal everyone around him on the fly. As stated earlier it should be possible to revive yourself, which would make his Self-revive obsolete. Stoker’s molotov deals way to much damage, you’re pretty much instakilled if it explodes and you’re caught by the flames - damage should be reduced so you have a chance to actually excape the flames but as it is that is not possible. Kira’s grenade launcher seems to be a bit overpowered as it can effective kill and entire team if they’re close by each other, which often happens in certain areas of the maps. Some mercs seem like they’re inadequate in terms of abilities an especially if you compare the different abilities. For instance Phantom’s refractive armor certainly is useful, however its very circumstancial, plus certain augments actually make that ability less useful because you’re more easily spotted, and some can spot you irregardless of the ability being activated - so I’d say that he could definitely use a secondary ability that supports his theme, like a distraction/decoy device - for instance a device that creates an illussion of him running from one point to another in a straight - line.

5/ Weapons & Abilities The game has an inherent game design flaw/issue with the abilities that functions like primary weapons, or should be considered primary weapons because of their function, power and uniqueness - weapons such as Nader’s grenade launcher, Rhino’s minigun, Spark’s Insta-revive gun, Kira’s orbital Laser Cannon, Arty’s Designator, Bushwacker’s Turret - however there exceptions here because not all should be considered primary weapons but definitely should be considered to be able to run out of ammo. -The grenade launcher should be considered a primary weapon rather than an ability and should NOT be getting ammo back based on a timer, but based on receiving ammo so you can’t just spam the the ability - because this is exactly what happens with Nader’s grenade launcher. Clearly you’re trying to theme Nader into an explosives specialist, so give Nader explosives - like time bombs, powerful C4 or similar as an ability. Also to mention that they actually have 3 weapons as opposed to two weapons. The same goes for Rhino’s Minigun, that should also be considered a primary weapon instead of an ability, instead give Rhino an ability to reduce damage significantly for a short while. Kira’s orbital laser is so powerful and controllable that it should be considered a primary weapon and spend “ammo” that only can be replenished by charging the device manually or with a charging station where she has to interact with it, much like how disarm works, just the opposite. Kira could get an ability instead like EMP grenade that disables everything electronically temporarily (with the exception of the objective) - this could be Proxy’s mines, Buschwacker’ Turret, Healing Stations, Ammo stations, etc. I hope you get the picture here, because I can go on with all the mercs that have abilities that should be considered primary weapons.

6/ Grenades These should not be abilities unless they’re a unique type - grenades should really be open to all mercs, because certain map points can be severely exploited with mines because you can’t directly shoot the mines because its in a blind spot where you need indirect fire to actually be able to set it off - which grenades can provide. Or say Bushwacker’s turret can be placed in blind spots/angles where it can hit you directly but you can’t it hit it directly unless you step out and exposing yourself too much.

7/ Trade-in A feature you should rework, because there is absolutely NO POINT in using it as its’ more a gamble than anything else and you would actually potentially get more out of trading up than you do trading in. I suggest change the Trade-in to be one card of same rarity and a price of 2-3000 credits, then it would make sense to do the trade in.

8/ A full team Party mode A feature that is seriously missing both in casual and ranked, and should certainly be in ranked before even attempting ranked play.

9/ Ranked play Currently you have chosen a solo/duo party mode for balancing purposes. You don’t launch a ranked season without having fixed core gameplay issues, map issues, balancing issues, merc abilities, etc. Besides the game is still in Beta and is no way ready for ranked play as it has some serious balancing issues, both map-wise, merc-wise and core gameplay, etch. One its issues has a severe direct impact on the core gameplay, which I mentioned above - spawnkilling. Also blasting off the first ranked season without full 5 player party is basically a big sign that says - the game isn’t really ready yet, but we’re impatient and want this show on the road. What professional players see on the sign - A waste of time and money because you can’t play with your clanmates - this game isn’t ready for ranked gameplay.

As most ranked play goes currently is much like casual play, not much communication going on, players just play randomly, teamkill, spawnkilling. In fact I’d get more out of playing casual in terms of xp and credit income.

I know I have written quite a lot, but I could actually write more, however I have written enough for you to get a clear picture of the many aspects of the game needs to be reworked or the very least tweaked.

I sincerely hope you take this to heart because I like the game and would like to see it reach its full potential. Plus I mean no disrespect when I write this because I wouldn’t waste my time writing this much in-depth if I really didn’t care about the game."

This was the message that was been sent.

Also to mention that I have sent them feedback from within the game almost everytime I’ve played it.
…and at this point my experience of the game becomes worse and worse everytime I’ve played it because of people being douchebags, spawnrapers, etc.

If this game were emphazing on FAIR PLAY it would do a lot better and people would keep playing it.

Thank you for taking your time to read this - leave a comment with your thoughts about it :slight_smile:

/Tor.

NB: A little note in regards to Trade-ins… That definitely needs to be reworked - Because I’ve tried it and I ended up with one of the same cards traded in and the other cards lost. And I have noticed at least one other pointing out this on this forum.


(Glottis-3D) #2

who gave grenade launcher to Kira??
=)


(Szakalot) #3

and since when it penetrates ceiling?


(Tormentaius) #4

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;550251]who gave grenade launcher to Kira??
=)[/QUOTE]

That was a typo when I sent it but I’m sure they’re clever enough to actually figure out that I meant Nader. :wink:

I have seen it go through ceilings and straight into ground floor or 1st floor. It may be its not supposed to but it has.


(Rex) #5

[QUOTE=Tormentaius;550231]Hello everyone.

The Following has been sent to Splashdamage’s Community Manager on the 27’th of March 2016, and to their Facebook Fan/community page on 8’th of March 2016. No replies or written confirmation from Splash Damage or SD Community Manager. The following is an in-depth analysis of the game - feedback for the game with suggestions on how to fix certain issues. I’d also like to mention that the reason I’m now posting this here is to get some eyes on my analysis & feedback, and hopefully a dev or at least the community manager will see this. Currently I feel SD isn’t taking the feedback they get serious, because certain issues are still unadressed and breaks the game in so many ways.

Constructive feedback is encouraged and negative comments ignored!

So here is the message that was sent:

"Hello to the devs at Splash Damage.

First, I want to tell you that I’m experienced game tester and developer and after playing your game Dirty Bomb, I can be considered a beta tester for that particular game.[/QUOTE]

So you are an experienced game tester but you really posted on their facebook page instead of this forum here where all the communication between developers and community takes place?

It’s not like SD doesn’t take the feedback here serious, your first lines let it rather seem like you are just upset that no developer nor community manager personally replied to your feedback/questions. SD reads a lot of comments here, but they can’t just reply to everything we write and you aren’t the only one who came up with constructive feedback.

Also let me give you a quick tip on how to make your posts been read more likely by the devs: Keep it short but precise. A wall of text isn’t so inviting to read through, although it might include very good points. :wink:


(neg0ne) #6

I can be considered a beta tester for that particular game. I take that role seriously and leave you with feedback, suggestions how to fix certain issues.

Short Tip: starting an Email like this does not invite to take it too serious.
2nd Tip: KISS, Keep it simple stupid. Way too much text for the info

Some points might be not bad, though not new, but i sometimes have the impression that some people rather should to make their own game than try to change everything in another game until it suits their personal preferences.


(Tormentaius) #7

[QUOTE=Rex;550296]So you are an experienced game tester but you really posted on their facebook page instead of this forum here where all the communication between developers and community takes place?

It’s not like SD doesn’t take the feedback here serious, your first lines let it rather seem like you are just upset that no developer nor community manager personally replied to your feedback/questions. SD reads a lot of comments here, but they can’t just reply to everything we write and you aren’t the only one who came up with constructive feedback.

Also let me give you a quick tip on how to make your posts been read more likely by the devs: Keep it short but precise. A wall of text isn’t so inviting to read through, although it might include very good points. :wink:[/QUOTE]

Because I only recently found the forum, besides I wanted it to get attention and not just get ignored or be shot down by more experienced players (those you’d call the veterans already).

I’m not upset, but clearly when they receive an email with high priority and don’t at least respond to it with a confirmation of receiving it sort of seems like they don’t care. Especially when many of the issue with game was present in it first early build, alpha and now beta, its a clear indication that they don’t seem to care about the feedback, because I have seen those topics raised in the steam community, not a single dev have posted there. But that is besides the point if they’ve responded or not, fact is that the issues have been raised, but not been fixed.

As to the wall of text, do keep in mind that this was sent as email, as an in-depth and detailed analysis of the game in its current build at the time, and as such I have to adress all the issues in one go, even if it seems intimidating. I do realize that on a forum where other people express their opinion and give constructive feedback they can’t just reply to everything, but again do keep in mind that it was formatted and sent as an actual email.

…I do intend on seperating all the issues adressed here in seperate posts if a developer doesn’t actually give it attention.

[QUOTE=neg0ne;550299]Short Tip: starting an Email like this does not invite to take it too serious.
2nd Tip: KISS, Keep it simple stupid. Way too much text for the info

Some points might be not bad, though not new, but i sometimes have the impression that some people rather should to make their own game than try to change everything in another game until it suits their personal preferences.[/QUOTE]

The feedback they get they should take serious as long as its actually understandable and have valid points to support them.

If some of the issues and points aren’t new but are still being raised, then its an indication that there is an issue they need to adress.
In regards to people should make their own game just because they raise a lot of issues and points with a game - I must say I disagree with that and the
reason I disagree is that there is a reason that those issues and points are raised and don’t have to be a matter of personal preference, even if its a lof of aspects in the game that is being pointed out. Consider that it might be an indication of testers/devs having a low or much different standard. Besides, they’re giving feedback on the current build of the game, not trying to make their own game.

…just take this aspect - Spawnkilling… That right there is a HUGE topic in it self and isn’t just a matter of preference but a clear indication of the game designers/developers emphasizing on either FAIR or HARDCORE Game play - in other words who the devs are trying to attract to the game - playerwise.

…when I review or analyze a game I look at it as whole and each individual aspect and sub-aspect, and that may be that it would seem that I might want to
change everything in the game, but thats from your perspective - from my perspective I’m just shedding light on the current issue with the game, where I try to remain as objective as I can.


(Nail) #8

the sense of entitlement is strong here

you want them to answer every freakin e-mail they get ? you’re bloody delusional


(prophett) #9

If I can’t see to the end of someone’s post without scrolling I normally don’t read it…


(Loffy) #10

Don’t read too much into it, imho. I think your mail just flew under their radar, even though your arguments and suggestions were valid, at a time when they had particularly many balls to juggle.


(Kl3ppy) #11

So you are sending an email with higfh priority to them and you wonder why you dont get an answer? When I recieve an email with high priority I have a look at the sender and if I dont know him/is not a customer/partner/colleague I might ignore it. I wouldnt answer the email too! There are enough forums where you can voice your feedback, no need to annoy the Developer with emails.


(Chris Mullins) #12

Apologies for lack of response to this. I saw the e-mail come in and wanted to dedicate time to it, but I’ve had to give other items priority I’m afraid. Please don’t feel like we aren’t listening to you. Often we’ll read threads/e-mails/comments etc. but not leave a responses as we don’t have time at that point, or we aren’t certain we’ll be able to follow up and we don’t want to leave you in the lurch. Here is some very condensed feedback for you:

  1. We do have spawn protection in game and it’s main purpose is to prevent teams getting wiped from tactical nades/airstrikes/molotovs as soon as their timer pops. We aren’t looking to make any additions to this feature as it’s mainly an issue due to something else, team balance. We are currently spending a lot of time working on Casual MM and potential incentives for Ranked to increase the player pool. These should fix the spawn camping issues at the root of it, not just fix one of the issues caused by it.

  2. We aren’t working on any other game-modes currently, but we do have ideas on what we would like to implement. With low players on teams, the only way to really remedy this is to keep players in the lobby for a longer but this may have a negative effect due to wait time. From personal experience it doesn’t take long for the server to fill up and people are usually pretty willing to restart the map from voting, however once Casual MM is in, this won’t be an issue anymore. Having everyone be able to self-revive isn’t something I believe we would put into the game as by leaving this out you have more tactical choices to make as a player. You don’t have to waste time and ammo gibbing downed players as you can decide if they are going to be revived or not. If a Medic is nearby, sure go for the gib or just kill the medic so they can’t get back up.

  3. Spawn areas can usually be accessed as we want players to be able to use them for travelling in various ways. Granted it is a pain when enemies use abilities to stop the spawn wave, but again this is caused to unbalanced teams which should be resolved from Casual MM and larger Ranked player pool.

  4. It’s interesting you raise these Mercs abilities as being too strong. Kira doesn’t really get talked about a lot as you can generally dodged the laser if you have good awareness. Phoenix is also considered to be the weakest of all the Medics. Stoker’s Molotov is very damaging, but it’s primary purpose is area denial, so if players could run through it, it would not be fulfilling its purpose. Phantom will be getting a re-work also to make him more team-orientated.

  5. I see what yo umean about weapons/abilities, however if Nader’s grenade launcher was based on ammo instead of refilling she could potentially perma-spam an area if she had an Ammo Station next to her which would be way too strong. Bushwhackers turrets are fairly weak and can be taken out easily, even when running full pelt into it so if they ran out of ammo or even over-heat this would seriously de-buff them. At the moment we are only looking to re-work Phantom and makes some tweaks to Thunder as everyone else we feel is in a good place (except for minor balance issues)

  6. Explosive spam is something which is already a concern for a number of players and if all players had grenades this would increase that drastically. If you are unable to shoot a mine/turret as it is around a corner then that has been great placement from the Proxy/Bushwhacker. If everyone had grenades then all deployables incl. Health and Ammo Stations would also be de-buffed.

  7. Discussions about Trade In come up every so often and could do with a review. I’ll poke the team.

  8. This is back in Ranked now and will also be included in Casual MM.

  9. We feel the game is strong enough in terms of maps, Mercs and balance for Ranked play. The other issues you raised usually are fixed naturally with a larger player pool which we want to address by looking at what incentives we offer. If players aren’t/don’t want to communicate there isn’t a huge amount we can do. This is up to how serious the team wants to play, but also brings along hardware restrictions.

What you say with fair play at the end I agree, but not everything needs to counter everything directly otherwise the competitive aspect is reduced. You should often find situations which you need to make a decision based on the unique situation. As a Proxy, I shouldn’t really be able to kill a Rhino and I will make the decision to either run away or stay and fight. Usually if I stay I will die (however it’s OK as I’ll time it to a spawnwave), but sometimes I’ll win which is a cool.

It’s hard trying to make the game accessible enough for new players, but at the same time deep enough for experienced ones. This is something we are learning and doing a lot of trial and error.

Thank you for your feedback, and again sorry for the delay. I hope this helps. If you have any questions feel free to ask and I will try to reply as soon as possible.


(Glottis-3D) #13

[QUOTE=shoe.;550495]9. We feel the game is strong enough in terms of maps, Mercs and balance for Ranked play.
[/QUOTE]

strong in terms of Maps.

Shoe with all due respect.
There is not a single map that is balanced enough for a real competition and/or is fun to play on all objectives.

  1. Dome has very bad, lacerated 3rd act. it is very boring in def and attack
  2. Chapel still has spawnkilling issues on 1st act, and last stage is still won only by spawraping defenders
  3. Bridge is still very bad at 1st stage - too much defence bias, because of EV postition and no sneak route. Last stage is much worse than Bridge-alt (and we stuck with it for a year now)
  4. Trainyard is still very spawnrapy and defence biased on 1st stage.
  5. Underground is just plain the most repetitive and thus boring map. it is tube-like with no sideroutes
  6. Terminal 1st. still has spawnrape issues, when generator blown

(Kl3ppy) #14

[QUOTE=shoe.;550495]Apologies for lack of response to this. I saw the e-mail come in and wanted to dedicate time to it, but I’ve had to give other items priority I’m afraid. Please don’t feel like we aren’t listening to you. Often we’ll read threads/e-mails/comments etc. but not leave a responses as we don’t have time at that point, or we aren’t certain we’ll be able to follow up and we don’t want to leave you in the lurch. Here is some very condensed feedback for you:

  1. We do have spawn protection in game and it’s main purpose is to prevent teams getting wiped from tactical nades/airstrikes/molotovs as soon as their timer pops. We aren’t looking to make any additions to this feature as it’s mainly an issue due to something else, team balance. We are currently spending a lot of time working on Casual MM and potential incentives for Ranked to increase the player pool. These should fix the spawn camping issues at the root of it, not just fix one of the issues caused by it.
    [/QUOTE]

Isnt the root of the issue the poor map design? It’s way too easy to spawn camp (e.g. Chapel last stage) even with balanced teams. Just get one lucky airstrike and gg.


(KeMoN) #15

I can’t agree here, since the rework I really love Dome and find it quite unfortunate that it is never being voted for. The only thing I think needs to be changed in this map are the truly useless ‘trick-jumps’ for the defenders in the last stage. I honestly have the impression that they take longer as compared to just take the ground path. Trickjumps should definitely be rewarded more!

I think the spawnkilling in the first stage is not because of poor map design, but rather due to unbalanced teams which have been addressed by shoe.
For the last stage however I have to agree with you, the objective is seriously close to the defender’s spawn and IF the attackers manage to hold the rock it directly turns into spawn-camping like you said. Nevertheless I weirdly don’t think it is poorly designed. Granted, it is a hard objective, but a well organized push by the attackers and the EMP charge goes through. It just requires more teamwork than usually, which I think is a good thing in a team- and class-based game.

For the 1st stage I quite agree with you. One or two well-placed healing stations on the defense basically win the map and if this is combined with a Rhino there is absolutely nothing you can do as attacker. Unfortunately I never played the alternative version of Bridge so I can’t say anything about that.

This one I don’t really agree with you. The attackers actually have 4 routes towards the objective and an MG with perfect line of sight on the C4. I find the 3rd stage way harder for the attackers. Quite often the 1st stage goes through in the first 1 or 2 minutes because the defending team is still loading the map or forced to watch the horribly unsyncronized instructions video…I so often see that and I absolutely hate it.

Yes, this map is mostly a meat-grind, but luckily the Skyhammer and Arty spam are not present in this map. Generally I feel like this map favors the attacking team, because if the doors are closed in the last stage the defenders only have the tube where they are in an elevated position, perfectly visible for all snipers and naders and with no option of left/right strafing because it is a tube. And a closed down corridor that can be easily blocked with abilities mines, turrets, molotovs,… isn’t really helping. Somehow though, this is in my experience one of the most voted maps and I also quite like it.

YES! Losing the generator is usually a death sentence for the attacking team.

//Everything in this post is based on pub and not ranked games!


(Chris Mullins) #16

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;550496]strong in terms of Maps.

Shoe with all due respect.
There is not a single map that is balanced enough for a real competition and/or is fun to play on all objectives.

  1. Dome has very bad, lacerated 3rd act. it is very boring in def and attack
  2. Chapel still has spawnkilling issues on 1st act, and last stage is still won only by spawraping defenders
  3. Bridge is still very bad at 1st stage - too much defence bias, because of EV postition and no sneak route. Last stage is much worse than Bridge-alt (and we stuck with it for a year now)
  4. Trainyard is still very spawnrapy and defence biased on 1st stage.
  5. Underground is just plain the most repetitive and thus boring map. it is tube-like with no sideroutes
  6. Terminal 1st. still has spawnrape issues, when generator blown[/QUOTE]

With maps they can be a little more one sided than others as both teams play each side so each will have the same advantage/disadvantage. It’s more of an issue in Objective than comp game-modes as users just play one side. Maps could be improved to help aid this, but we want to make the games be more balanced which will help solve these issues, rather than just improve the outcomes of the inherent issue.


(Kl3ppy) #17

Whats better with having 2 teams spawnrape each other on the first stage? Its boring!


(Szakalot) #18

its an issue for both. like people having been pointing out for years now, balancing the same map for both objective and stopwatch is never gonna work. You want attacker-biased sw maps, and not them double fullholds we keep seeing on multiple objectives. It is also not good design to push against enemy spawn, rather than a 3rd area of the map - the objective.

There has been a ton of other issues with maps, but I frankly don’t feel like talking over myself, and what others have said better, since, well, forever actually.


(Glottis-3D) #19

+1 Szaka

  1. Maps should favour fighting near objectives, not spawns. Pushing to spawns should be a possibility (it is a valid tactics), but it MUST be risky and much more difficult.
  2. More attack bias is needed via map design. You cannot hope for spawntimes to fix bad map design - it will never work in long terms.

Stopwatch is only a tool to neglect slight map-imbalance ssues.Like Kl3ppy said there is nothing good in 2 teams spawnrape eachother for 15+15 minutes.


(Glottis-3D) #20

Last stage of Dome has 2 parts

  1. The side objectives (2 doors) is actually very nice, but has issues
  2. Main objective is very bad. It doesnt have a frontline. all the fights are very messy, no coordination between flanks - due to lack of a frontline. Compare it to Chapel 1st or 3rd stage or Terminal any stage - when there is frontline (line of strong points for attack and line of strong points for defence) - there is realy good tactical game.