[BETA] Engagement 3.0 (6) - Updated 07 02 09

[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

[31stPzGren]

IMPORTANT NOTE: The Map is currently supported as a 4p_Betamap but it is meant to be played as a 6 Player map.

More screenshots will be uploaded when I get a game on it. If theres anyone out there who can help me with the graphical glitches I'll be very very happy.

Download Locations
http://files.filefront.com/4p+Betamapsga/;13228026;/fileinfo.html


Changelog for version 3.0
- Map "beautification" (Some Splats & Splines used. Details added to flora. Background added)
- Miscellaneous Bushs added. Map Layout Unchanged.

What will be implemented in the future
- River town will be further touched up as requested (Touch up has been done)
- Improved Sectoring (Sectors has been expanded slightly)
- More splats/details/beautifying work will be done once the layout is confirmed. (Additional Beautification takes time & experience)
- The map will have differential height (Done)
- The map might cater for a 3v3 MCP (Implemented)

Changelog for version 2.2
- River has been turned into a stream ending in a lake and made smaller.
- Map has been changed to Objective Capture Popcap
- Loading screen briefing for a rough idea of what to capture
- Map made bigger to reduce "clumping"
- Forest removed and replaced with a fields and sporadic trees
- Cities moved further from spawn
- Church & Chateau replaced with smaller buildings.
- Miscellaneous new buildings added.

Changelog for version 2.3
- Loading screen briefing for a rough idea of what to capture
- One building at River Town touched up
- Sectors adjusted to be uneven. One new sector added. Four old sectors removed.
- Map renamed to 4p_Engagement.sga
- Game now allows for 2v2 or 3v3


Feedback
- Any feedback provided will be appreciated. Please give feedback in detailed manner, including a suggestion if possible. All feasible feedback will be implemented in the map.

Attachment: http://www.yourfilelink.com/get.php?fid=485186

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Baine]

Looks interesting, just one thing; i think the town (last pic) could use a little bit more detail, other than that, sweet!

[Lai]

Cut the bridges/water chokes. Map won't be successful with those. Otherwise, interesting...

[MannfredvonRitter]

Remove some cover slightly to reduce the power of allied armour, put things back in balance again, the current setup favoured crocs.

Use some terrain which 'funnels' battles more, this will make the 2v2 work imo.

Alter building placement slightly make them strategic but not so much so as to block view too much.

[Sach]

would like to try it as a 3v3, 2c2 there was too much space

[MistenTHA]

Map is opposite of most maps; focal areas are generally to the sides and not middle of the map; no defensive line formable at 1/3 or 2/3 of the map.

Opposite also in the sense that other maps have most buildings in the middle to be fought over; here it's all to the edges.

Very open, supports company builds that move fast and do not rely on support teams to hold position.

Open flanking layout results in 2v2s becoming separate 1v1s generally. 3v3 would be interesting to try.

Bridges don't really matter, the river can be crossed at virtually all points, making it more of an aesthetic thing.

Overall it's totally different from your average map, and can provide an interesting change of pace from your average map.

But having virtually no chokepoints throughout most of the map may gimp some companies.

[sg31stPzrGrenadier]

Noted. Will work on it over the weekend.

[MistenTHA]

Note on 2nd playthrough:

Maybe cause used to the map now, seems better, hold strongpoints on both sides, mobile forces cross over in middle.

Remember to change the house on the left side; no window so it can't fire north. The tall brown wooden one.

Haven't tried from north so I don't know.

Get the positions in so you know when map is fixed which side you're on.

[Schultz]

A couple of things.

The river hinders action and it gives significant disadvantage to the tem that starts from the bottom.
It forces it to two areas of movement, the upper and the right.
Going north is not the best way cause the opposite team can block the area with atgs and mgs.
Even if the river is crossable you cant really take the risk cause a well placed enemy force can make you regret it.
So you're left with the right side, and you need to make your way through a narrow area, where you and your teamate will be clustered together.
Arti can be devastating in this.

I can advice:

Limit the river.
Better sectors and layout.
More open map without so many natural or artificial restraints.
Church needs fixing.
Roads need to be reworked.
Make it more fluid and easy to move.
Make it fair for both teams, deny the disadvantages.

The river and the bridges in their current use and implementation have to hugely reconsidered.

All in all, i have to say it was interesting.

[Doce]

This map has potential.
I would advise doing something first about the objectives. I only saw one the entire game, and so that was the only population we fought over. I think there was a town up on your side near your spawn that had like a town square and such; that would be a cool place to fight over. Right now your map just feels like several clusters of buildings separated from each other by expanses of trees and grass. Not very exciting. The river is a feature that you could capitalize on, though. One imagining of this map could be the river trisecting (or however many-secting) a bigger town, with each of the current little towns acting as an objective. They should be closer together to facilitate teamwork (easier to help each other) and encourage meatgrinding. If they were close enough together, mobile artillery would be nicely balanced in that you risk your neck bringing it on your front lines since your enemy is feet anyway from you. Whatever you decide to do, I think you should expound on what you wanted to see with flanking tactics and such. That is a rare strategy that I bet people would be thrilled to use in a fun way.
I noticed that all four spawns are on long stretches of pristine road. I concede that it is a tool to direct each player to a critical or useful point, but it also makes players very vulnerable to artillery and airborne. Units wanting to reinforce one of those points find themselves dashing precariously through wide zones of negative cover. The whole map seems like it has been untouched. All buildings are full health, there are no (that I noticed) wrecks, craters, or anything. This encourages blobbing and overall unskillful gameplay. Create cover other than hedges and sporadic bushes!
The town in which we did most of our fighting was not very interesting to fight in. I mentioned to you earlier that you might consider creating a sort of symmetry of buildings reflected across the road. That way players are on even fields and are posed with a choice - do long range battle or risk crossing the red cover for close combat? Instances such as this are all over this map; it has the potential to create a variety of scenarios to test and develop players' skills.

That's all I can think of now, I suppose. It's a privilege, as always. Keep up the good work!

[chuayihau]

Removed.

[bfhogues]

Good map, makes for a nice change of pace from the shifting front lines style. Maybe add some hedgerows or something to break up the expanse of wilderness between towns(but not too much, the openness adds alot to tactics and favors a more fluid battle).

[MistenTHA]

Overall feels a lot more fun and engaging this time run. Tankers should have lots of fun with this.

But map bleed needs to be a lot more strong if a team manages to dominate most of the map. Being able to capture any and every sector possible in OCP favours allies, since riflemen are cheap, and also airborne players, who can drop in anywhere and very likely be able to hold it very well.

Perhaps make the starting towns for both sides give very little pop cap bonus, and give more pop cap bonus to those in the middle of the map. Or 1 sector for the starting towns, then 2-3 for those in the middle.

With the current sector/pop layout it kinda promotes defensive/artillery companies because they don't have to worry about losing the game badly due to pop cap bleed, they get enough and use artillery to kill things. And the starting towns are very very easily fortified, improving the protection that these artillery pieces get. Contrast to other maps where the starting points of the map have virtually nothing that can be used for protection except maybe 1 house, so artillery pieces are very exposed. And if they use units to protect the artillery, pop cap bleed happens very fast. Here, you can guard the artillery easy, not get pop cap bled much, and able to get a lot of kills. Not a good thing.



0.42/0.58 initial for capping almost the whole map isn't that great a penalty, if you're down to your starting town it should be more like 0.3/0.7.

[notenome]

I definetly believe the bleed should be stronger. Also the wilderness could use more decoration but that comes with time, some more hedgerows would be nice and some more stuff for cover, which is scarce in the emptiness. Also I would suggest giving some of the towns walls to make them more defensible, but most of all the towns should be split into more sectors. Especially in a game vs airborne, every town needs to be defended which makes it awful hard if you dont have enough pop cap and the open expanse allows any town to get 'back capped'. One thing I would say is that the rivers dont seem to make much of an effect (in our game they didnt at least), so maybe they could be shifted around or even have one of the two bridges blown or something to make them more of a factor. Lastly, as this is a map where sight range is important, I would suggest having one or two tall buildings that give a wide sight range, that would help with spotting units trying to infiltrate across (basically observation towers). Overall a very good map and a nice change of pace, the only big thing I have with it is the bleed and that it might favour AB a little too much.

[MistenTHA]

Strange though how all the factors we listed contributed to our loss earlier... hmm problem with the map or problem with us 

[31stPzGren]

*Bump* I need more feedback.

[31stPzGren]

*Bump* I need more feedback.

[lisek1989]

*Bump* I need more food.

Direction >>> groceries store.

[MistenTHB]

12236

3v3 replay on this map. Almost 1 hour long.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Arminius]

After playing on it, the map could really use some spicing up terrain wise. The bright green grass just doesn't look good all over the map. most of the map feels kind of empty.