BLOCKOUT WEDNESDAYS: Canary Wharf

(MrFunkyFunk) #41

Which part of the map/objective you like most and why?

  • I really like the first one. Giving the opportunity to the attackers to be able to gain more routes into the room acts as a pressure relief system.
    You can do two obj at the same time: forcing and battling your way to the consoles through a single door or opening new ones to try to make cracks in the def team’s wall. It feels really dynamic
  • The hallway past the second obj, nice chokepoint, wish there were more parts like this one on other maps.
    I also like the openess of the last stage, altho now it’s kind of a shooting range for snipers and the escape routes are too forgiving to the attackers…

Which part of the map/objective you dislike most and why?
The second one, it lacks another distinctive way for the attackers imho, the middle doors one and secondary obj one are still too connected (put a few defenders into the console room and you can efficiently lock both avail routes).
The last one when in def, not much you can do to stop the carriers once they left the obj original position.

Do you find any particular part of the map useless?
Nothing that irrelevant so far.

Which route/position do you find the most useful when attacking/defending particular objectives?
Like others have said above, anything that can give you a significant edge against the opponent (visibility, space, …)
1st obj def: two right rooms that allow you to see pretty much everything
2nd obj def: far right corridor and the two platforms in front of the consoles
3rd obj def: left stairs and at the front/blow the crane or any of the platforms to cover a particular angle

1st obj atk: middle route and right elevator
2nd obj atk: left corridor or right pipe climbing (not the easiest one)
3rd obj atk: right escalators (straight to the ground level or jumping after the first flight directly on the crane platforms)

Maybe there could be some jumping tricks way using flying steel beams lifted by cranes and going to or near the carryable deposit point. You’d still be vulnerable but it could sometime allow you to intercept the cells.
It wouldn’t be op since you’re still very much exposed in all directions, and you can still fall and take considerable damages.
It would take advantage of the large open space of that stage.

(Siru) #42

at the last objective you can place 1 or 2 elevators with a bridge or corridor between defenders and attackers. maybe it would be a nice longer objective run to finish it ?!?
with a good defense it’s hard to get the objectives but when you get it - the way back is too short and defenders are chanceless.

Open the gates to the “Elite pack” ?
+1

(tokamak) #43

It suits the geometry in this case. The exit route provides perfect cover but is also very long. This creates the perfect pursuit scenario. It’s much more interesting than the attackers having to break through something.

(BomBaKlaK) #44

HELL NOOOOO ! dont slow down the carrier !!!
Just need a better check to the spawn location !
when you make a carrying objective remember Island ! it’s one of the best carrying objective map.
Remember ETQW carrying objectives ! one the best settings for this obj-type

You need the defender spawn to be near the transmission room, or give them a quick acces, and not to the pick up point like it is without any route to intercept datacore, defense is not able to do anything with this kind of objective/spawn location.

(Kendle) #45

Indeed, but the geometry sucks! Fix the problem, not the symptom, change the route so that defence can intercept the carrier. :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #46

I just think this game has room for multiple types of carriables. In Camden you meet the enemy head on so slowing down is less warranted. Here you’re escaping away from the defenders and thus trying to prevent the defenders from catching up with you is more interesting than trying to make the map more like something that already exists.

(Kendle) #47

Well that’s a matter of opinion. A route that takes you from a place a safety to a place of danger, or vice versa, simply creates a meat-grinder / lemming rush experience at one end or the other, and it becomes a repetitive war of attrition. If that floats your boat fine, but it sure as hell doesn’t mine.

(Scrupus) #48

Was going to write some feedback on the last version, but after taking a quick look at the new one, I think I have to wait after next playtest - man, someone’s been working hard - so many interesting changes! :slight_smile:

Especially for the second objective, looks really cool! But I’m offline for the next 4 days, so gotta wait for next Wednesday or so :frowning:

You others should take a look, and give it a spin during weekend :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #49

That´s why you want players to run fast towards danger (camden) but be slowed down while running away from it (Canary). I see no reason why both need to be the same package and have the same weight. They can both be transport objectives but there’s no valid reason to give them both exactly the same ruleset.

(Kendle) #50

Are you familiar with the expression “polishing a turd”?

At this stage of development (Alpha) I’d rather encourage SD to make proper doc run objectives, not help them make bad mechanics somehow palatable.

(tokamak) #51

It’s not a tacked on fix, it’s a happy accident on which you can expand to create something entirely new.

(Raviolay) #52

Why not have fewer carryable objectives in Canary only it requires two to carry one back at Camden speed?

(BomBaKlaK) #53

all “Open hack” type objectives, make this map the biggest lemming rush ever after the first objective.