Maps played 14/03/10

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Unkn0wn]

I'm sure they would appreciate some maps from you

[Killer344]

Uhmmm...mmm.. what about PP rewards for the people that makes maps...

[Duckordie]

How about feedback? 

[Mysthalin]

I tend to just ignore mysthalin's bickering.

Anyhow, most people aren't being serious Masacree.

That's because you aren't a perfectionist, Unknown. I want the maps I play on to be perfect in gameplay.
Of course, my idea of perfect gameplay includes the abolition of support weapons so that doesn't quite work, so I constantly have to rethink what perfect gameplay is for me.

So I just make due if the map is at least :

not made for support spam
I can see my units without them being blocked by 10000 trees
my units don't get stuck over a little wall every 2 feet
There's plenty(or enough) flanking possibilities
It has a non-retarded height map.

[Masacree]

Coh would be a shitty game without support weapons. Suppression is what made coh unique.

You're insane.

[Unkn0wn]

Oh trust me, I'm quite the perfectionist already.
Ask anyone that has submitted maps to EIR, I'm sure they'll all probably say I'm too strict, map nazi, whatever  

However, just because maps don't correspond with your views on how they should play out doesn't make them bad maps. You may not like certain maps but the games played list clearly proves you wrong when you claim it's a bad map.

Quite honestly, it's pretty arrogant for you to generalise your own opinion on maps into 'truths'.
Mysthalin says Crossroads is a bad map so I guess that does make it a bad map, despite the overwhelming amount of players that will disagree.  

Next time you publicly disrespect something someone has spent hours on creating you could at least keep it as an opinion rather than making it seem like a fact.

That goes for everyone when discussing maps on these forums, to be honest.

[Mysthalin]

You may not like certain maps but the games played list clearly proves you wrong when you claim it's a bad map.

Plenty of those plays are due to people playing maps that are the PP map. There's been plenty times when I've joined a game that's set to bergen/crossroads/whatever the PP map was last week and say the PP map is a different one and everyone responds in sighs of relief and how much they hate the map that the game had been set to. A map getting plays doesn't necessarily mean it's a good map, either - it may just mean people want PPs.

Words such as "Love/Like/Dislike/Hate" are all opinions from the get-go, Unknown. Whenever I say I love/hate a map for some reason - it's clear from the very start it's my opinion. However, unlike most people, I actually have the courtesy to express my reasons as to WHY I harbour a profound hate/love for a map. I guess that makes it look like I'm putting forward a fact and backing it up with arguments, and it gives off the impression of me forcing an undeniable truth - but it is not so. It's my opinion. Even if I base it with arguments.

Coh would be a shitty game without support weapons. Suppression is what made coh unique.

Suppression isn't exclusive to support weapons. I too love the fact you can defeat a larger enemy by employing superior tactics, but I dislike the slower-paced gameplay support weapons bring.

[Two]

tbh warmap also has alot to do with what map people play

[Unkn0wn]

tbh warmap also has alot to do with what map people play

This is not entirely correct, maps like Monte Cassino getting 50 plays are case in point that people rely less on the warmap than one would at first assume. Tanteville hasn't been featured on the warmap since the beginning of the war and yet it went from about 100 to 300 plays regardless.

Words such as "Love/Like/Dislike/Hate" are all opinions from the get-go, Unknown.

They are, too bad those are not the words you use to describe your sentiments about maps eh?

[skaffa]

Bergen is the best 2vs2 map in my opinion.

Its layout is almost symmetrical, balanced no matter where you start.
It has open spaces and a city, best of both worlds.
The open spaces around the entire city makes it possible to flank pretty much all the time, it doesnt have to become a 1 front battle like in Bocage for example.
The map is good for flanking but its also good for AT gun walls.
The best part I like about it, is that you can move around the map with your entire army very quickly, when the enemy still thinks he is in front of you, you can alrdy be behind them. Its not so static as some other maps.

[Mysthalin]

Words such as "Love/Like/Dislike/Hate" are all opinions from the get-go, Unknown.

They are, too bad those are not the words you use to describe your sentiments about maps eh?

I generally do. Of course not in this thread in which I originally replied in mostly a joking manner, but if you would be as kind to remember, you'd see that I mostly express my opinion, not a "truth" when I cry foul about a map.

[CafeMilani]

Bergen is the best 2vs2 map in my opinion.

Its layout is almost symmetrical, balanced no matter where you start.
It has open spaces and a city, best of both worlds.
The open spaces around the entire city makes it possible to flank pretty much all the time, it doesnt have to become a 1 front battle like in Bocage for example.
The map is good for flanking but its also good for AT gun walls.
The best part I like about it, is that you can move around the map with your entire army very quickly, when the enemy still thinks he is in front of you, you can alrdy be behind them. Its not so static as some other maps.

+1
symmetrical maps = balanced.

[Mysthalin]

I do agree with the fact that symmetry allows for balance disregarding spawn positions, though it doesn't necessarily balance the map across factions.

What I dislike about bergen is the fact the town is somewhat too cramped, and thus it's just too much of a danger to attempt to enter it with a vehicle, and it makes HMGs positioned in the... "Inner Circle" of the buildings near redundant due to grenades and mortar fire.
Also, the fields could be just a bit larger - no matter where you are in the fields, an AT gun on the edge of the city will almost always be able to hit you. Just a bit more space wouldn't hurt the map. It is indeed not a truly horrible map, yet making it just a bit less narrow and cramped could make it better.

[Masacree]

Wait, what?

First of all the town is so cramped that hmgs are useless, which according to your past criteria ought to be a good thing. But then you say that the fields are so open an ATG can effectively lock them down, but your solution is to make them MORE open, which would simply make them and hmgs more powerful?

wtf?

[shockcoil]

Tbh I like Bergen for some of the reasons mentioned above. It's open enough for flanking and the town isn't so cramped that flanking there is impossibe (although I would like to see all those fucking trucks removed on all maps). Even if the enemy gets a camp going, there more than enough buildings that you can just jump in one and flank with infantry.

[LeoPhone]

ahh.. at last feedback  

all the points you make are very good. and id like to modify bergen a bit. i can make it wider and longer coz the stamp tool has been fixed, opening up town will be indeed a good thing, but do i also need to make the area between every single building big enough to make vehicles go through? that will just make the town bigger again and leth you camp in it with AT guns pointing to the sides,

but tbh, those atgs can only fire on the sides if there is being scouted for them, and also they are very close to buildings so you can simply run into them with some assault troops.

also renember that vehicles just are worse in town areas than in open fields. im sure noone would drive their tank at max speed through a town in WW2.
the annoying thing is just the piats and stickeys dominating such areas.

and ofcourse... will unkown think its worth lething everyone download the map again?  

[skaffa]

If you change it, make sure to keep the old one in aswell.

You should really try to make it into a 3v3 tho.

[Unkn0wn]

I don't think you need to touch Bergen. It's as good as it gets and by constantly trying to improve it you risk making it worse. (That's what happened to some of duck's maps :p)

[LeoPhone]

I don't think you need to touch Bergen. It's as good as it gets and by constantly trying to improve it you risk making it worse. (That's what happened to some of duck's maps :p)

rgr

[Duckordie]

I don't think you need to touch Bergen. It's as good as it gets and by constantly trying to improve it you risk making it worse. (That's what happened to some of duck's maps :p)

you sux, If you got feedback, dont whant a change, tell me. Bastard