bridge... whyyyyyyyyyyyy

(titan) #41

another bump
we miss u bridge_alt :frowning:

#42

I agree, bring back bridge alt.

To whoever was arguing about it’s layout, here is a link to a shoutcasted SW match on bridge_alt:
http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/41541-Weekly-or-so-community-frags?p=510582&viewfull=1#post510582

The reason why it was easier to defend in ET was the fact you only needed to touch the Gold to return it. In DB you have to stand still for good five seconds right beside attackers spawn praying they have horrible aim. While this mechanic may work perfectly on Whitechapel, it’s complete pain in Bridge.

(titan) #43

bump!
the last obj remains a bit of a nightmare and the fact you can just nade the pump faster than you can c4 it nullifies it even being there
this map aint being picked in dirtycups for a reason
#bringbackalt get it trending!

(Rémy Cabresin) #44

Actually enjoy Bridge the most as a map, it’s has a lot more competitive value compared to for example Underground and Terminal. Bridge allows for a lot of creative play on both attack and defense on all stages. But it’s definitely true that the middle stage is awkward with the barrier generator being destructible with non C4 damage.Rest of the stages are fine to be honest, you could say that ‘once attackers grab docs defenders have no chance’ but dMon vs lobbyboyZ in the ESL cup semi final where we set up defense around the container and held that for a good couple of minutes winning the game. It’s not easy to set up in this stage, but it’s definitely doable if you call it at the right time(you don’t notice it as much due to the camera being on zups most of the time but we had a sick crossfire on the container from a few angles). Which I think is how it should be, the only change on that stage to make this somewhat easier for the defenders it to somehow move the defending spawn closer a little bit but this also increase how easy attacking team can spawnkill on that side of the building. Thin line, so no major changes there tbh.

My suggestion for the Bridge barrier stage though:
Right now the barrier can’t be rebuild if the EV is in its final spot in front of the barrier. Make it so that the barrier can always be rebuild as long as the EV hasn’t driven over it. This way you get a dynamic between rebuilding the EV and rebuilding the barrier. The attacking team has to make sure the EV is built at the time the Barrier blows up and the defending team can smartly destroy the EV when the barrier is about to blow up. This way planting C4 also becomes more appealing for attackers as they can try to sync the barrier blowing up(and defending it) with rebuilding the EV, and the defenders can try to sync destroying the EV with it as-well.

(BioSnark) #45

This map is amazing. Perfect for completely destroying OB newbies at the spawn. Everything right about db map design. So glad it exists!

/sarcasm

(Rémy Cabresin) #46

[QUOTE=BioSnark;530392]This map is amazing. Perfect for completely destroying OB newbies at the spawn. Everything right about db map design. So glad it exists!

/sarcasm[/QUOTE]

Complaining about spawn rape is the most useless argument for map design in stopwatch/objective. It has nothing to do with map design, if a team is able to spawnrape the other it means the team getting raped is just bad and has no map control. Spawnrape because of map design would be being able to throw an airstrike from your spawn to the other spawn without risking anything.

(Glottis-3D) #47

you are wrong, mate.
In Dirtybomb in several maps there are some real drawbacks in map layout, making it very easy to spawnrape.
-Height advantage for defs.
-Narrowing of the atackers paths and chokepoints

(Rémy Cabresin) #48

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;530394]you are wrong, mate.
In Dirtybomb in several maps there are some real drawbacks in map layout, making it very easy to spawnrape.
-Height advantage for defs.
-Narrowing of the atackers paths and chokepoints[/QUOTE]

Ofcourse some spawns are easier spawnrapeable than others. But there are no solutions to fix it due to how the gamemode works. You can put the spawn on a ****ing tower with only 1 elevator going up and down and some idiot will go up the elevator with a nade in his hand. You can put instagib turrets in front of spawn and the campers will wait just around the corner where the turrets are. You can put a roof over all spawns and the spawnrape will be with crossfires in the exits and nades and other things. You can move all the spawns so far away from things they can’t reach it with any spam but then they have to walk forever to the objectives so the attackers have no chance or the defenders can’t defend properly. There is simply no solution versus spawnrape, it will always happen if one team is simply ****tier than the other team. There is always a way if the other team is bad enough. This is not because of map design, it’s because the team getting raped is ****ty enough to allow spawnrape.

(BioSnark) #49

Yeah, we agree that “some spawns are easier spawnrapeable than others.”* Thus, the argument that map design is unrelated to spawn rape is incorrect.

I miss overground.

(Szakalot) #50

i don’t think anybody is disagreeing here. Spawncamp happens when one team is heavily outmatched.

It is still true though, that on some maps/ it will be more painful than others.

Some spawncamp-whine will come from people not liking getting outmatched. In many cases however, it will be due to a feeling of getting boxed in, without an ability to retaliate. Underground 1st phase, terminal 1st obj after generator is blown, trainyard 1st obj all give a very bad feel when spawncamped as attackers.

(Rémy Cabresin) #51

[QUOTE=BioSnark;530396]Yeah, we agree that “some spawns are easier spawnrapeable than others.”* Thus, the argument that map design is unrelated to spawn rape is incorrect.

I miss overground.[/QUOTE]

Oke sorry there is a map design flaw. All the maps should look the exact same with the exact same spawn area so the spawns aren’t as spawnkillable…

(BioSnark) #52

Totes magotes.

In any case, it’s the intended design that attackers run into a horrible choke point and die, repeatedly, for several minutes, until def wins or they manage to break the choke. This isn’t because defenders are more skilled, but because this version of the map is designed around a kill box. It doesn’t take a lot of skill to sit around with a nest of turrets, stations, and rhinos. It just takes patience to have to sit through boring map design.

(Rémy Cabresin) #53

[QUOTE=BioSnark;530414]Totes magotes.

In any case, it’s the intended design that attackers run into a horrible choke point and die, repeatedly, for several minutes, until def wins or they manage to break the choke. This isn’t because defenders are more skilled, but because this version of the map is designed around a kill box. It doesn’t take a lot of skill to sit around with a nest of turrets, stations, and rhinos. It just takes patience to have to sit through boring map design.[/QUOTE]

That’s what attacking means though. You think the allied soldiers in WW2 didn’t have to overcome a chokepoint or a hard capture point to win the war? The point of attacking is that you have to breach a defense :stuck_out_tongue: CS has this, CoD has this, ET has this, TF2 has this, every game has this. That’s just how attack vs defense works

(BioSnark) #54

In other words, you think all objective area level design is the same? Tell me more…

(Szakalot) #55

actually, almost all objectives are rectangular areas in which you plant/defuse/deliver/repair

(BioSnark) #56

The level of advantage they give the defense and the amount of freedom both teams have to adapt to various plays, if you will, matters. What shape they look like doesn’t matter.

(Szakalot) #57

the main issue of monotonous shape is that the objective are has to be completely cleared out of enemies to do the obj. there are very few cases of ‘sneak in to do obj - force enemy to engage’, most notable being terminal containers