Hey wolfnemesis75, can you give me your input on my map please, http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30482 It’s only a first version so be fair please.
It contains a forward spawn though, maybe this will make it a bad map? I would like to know your thoughts on this matter.
I also don’t have the defense spawn 5m away from the objective, would this cause problems for the map balance?
Just commenting on the point about stopwatch being the answer to balancing issues: SD has always favoured bigger, multistage, maps geared towards a pub style of gaming - they never produced anything for RTCW that was designed for stopwatch matches and I reckon that remained the case with both W:ET and ET:QW.
More generally there are a couple of maps that continue to seem stalled at the first objective (Reactor springs to mind). Simple change in spawntimes would go a long way. Pity it’s not like the ‘old days’ when, along with 10ft deep snow, you could set the spawntimes in the server config.
edit: meant to add, it would also make life interesting if the command posts, when captured, became selectable spawn points for the offensive team. current locations might not make that appropriate but at least they would become a lot more relevant to the game.
To be fair they managed to make some nice maps for competition for both ET and ET:QW, although in ET only one of those are still been played today, Radar but I seem to remember Oasis was played for quite a long while before been dropped and in ET:QW we had Sewer, Salvage, Area22. (not counting the maps that the community altered).
However were these by ‘accident’ or were they indeed made with competition in mind, I would like to think they were but it’s hard to say as you are quite right, SD do favor a different style of gameplay for the majority of their maps that many competition folk find hard to swallow.
I’m a strong believer though that a competition map and a public don’t have to be perceived as polar opposites, I’m pretty sure that the public players found all the maps previously mentioned to be great fun, it would be nice if in future games they were more maps geared towards competition as they are also going to be cracking public maps also, it’s not like you would be just wasting resources developing a map for a minority as the majority will lap it up also, it’s a win win situation no?
I’m not for one second though suggesting that all maps for a given game should be made with competition in mind as that could result in the loss of more ‘experimental’ maps that try a different approach, Railgun in ET been a prime example, the nature of the map was quite a risk to take and certainly might not have come about if they were following competition ‘guidelines’ for maps, it doesn’t play like any other map found in ET and is quite fun, if only they fixed the Axis 1st spawn problem it could have been legendary.
The two infantry maps would be an example (then again, volcano has half the map ommited in comp). ETQW aimed at 24 players. The main reason comp doesn’t do that is because of logistics, not because it wouldn’t make for a fun competitive mode.
I’d say all ETQW maps, except for that last volcano mission, would make good comp maps if it weren’t for that player limit.
Brink would be different here as the 8v8 is already much more suited for comp.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;369838]
I’m not for one second though suggesting that all maps for a given game should be made with competition in mind as that could result in the loss of more ‘experimental’ maps that try a different approach, Railgun in ET been a prime example, the nature of the map was quite a risk to take and certainly might not have come about if they were following competition ‘guidelines’ for maps, it doesn’t play like any other map found in ET and is quite fun, if only they fixed the Axis 1st spawn problem it could have been legendary.[/QUOTE]
Railgun was removed from ET comp for a few seasons at the beginning because it was a full-hold fest like most of the other maps. Once there was map scripts and spawn time settings changed to make it offensively biased (actually completable on even teams) it was put back in and it was great. It maintained all the dynamic play that the original had yet it was way more fun since you could actually complete the map and it wouldn’t devolve into one team stuck in spawn for 20 minutes.
This can be done on all current maps for Brink, just simply make them offensively biased and use Stopwatch as default and you instantly solve all balance problems and make the maps fun to play.
Ah right, didn’t know it was picked up again, I kind of stopped playing ET ages ago.
I’m not sure if just altering spawn times would be enough, it would certainly help, I’ve not tried the new times on stopwatch yet as no one seems to play that anymore. I think competition in Brink is a lost cause now.
Erm not sure tok, Slipgate and Canyon are just crackers. Be interesting to see quarry played in an organised manner at 12 v 12.
I tried to avoid mentioning competition, as what was put forward was making stopwatch the default for all pub games in order to somehow ‘balance’ the map design.
For me stopwatch maps should be 15min max, especially if there’s any danger of fullholds…the multistage maps still take an age to complete by which time half the server will empty rather than running through all over again.
I completely agree that out of all the work SD have done Brink should and could be the closest to a competition friendly game (small’ish maps, little to no WMDs, etc) - however the 8v8 limit to me seems like a design decision predicated on the limitation of p2p on consoles rather than any conscious decision to move towards an aim based ‘skilled’ comp game …
As an aside, can you imagine if the bot on container city could be reversed by having resistance standing beside it - Railgun was hardcore 
Canyon, Slipgate, Valley, Refinery and Outskirts would be pretty undoable with an organised defense. Same with Sewer, if you’d allow all vehicles. For pub though, they’re pretty decent maps, and with alterations through etqwpro, Refinery, Valley and Outskirts are pretty playable in the 6v6/4v4 formats.
[QUOTE=V1cK_dB;369631]I run a business. I sometimes wish that my customers were as understanding as you are when things don’t pan out 100% but of course I live in the real world and that’s not how it works.
I can appreciate that the devs are on here and it seems like they are communicating more which is cool. That doesn’t mean that some people can’t voice their displeasure. The devs are big boys and girls. They can handle the criticism. It even looks like they are listening since they are trying to reduce spread and started a whole new forum for that. Without people voicing their opinions…that would have never happened and we would be stuck with what they originally released.
I also think that the dude you were replying to had some valid points. He was expecting Brink to live up the SD’s previous efforts like W:ET. SD even mentioned how they had top players from W:ET help them with the game. Why is he a bad guy for then expecting Brink to have gameplay similarities with SD’s previous games? It seems like most people had that expectation. SD knew that. They didn’t come through and are trying to fix it. It’s true you can’t make everyone happy but when you disappoint the majority that is a problem.
[/QUOTE]
The problem is, the way some people go about their criticism on this board is appalling. Too many 2nd hand opinions churned out over and over. People here pretend they care about SD but they clearly are just spreading lies and misconceptions about the game - as well as good constructive feedback from others that probably wouldn’t be fixed without their feedback.
I am a fussy gamer and I’ve played PC FPS far too long to mention. I’ve played every SD game from launch (or before - woop look at me!) - It really baffles me how so many people don’t like Brink or think it’s as broke as they say it is. Yeah, things need changing and SD have been great at making changes so far (regardless of if it was right for the game to be released like that in the first place)
I can’t understand how so many long time fans like myself think Brink is such a disappointment compared to their older games. What I think it is, I have an open mind on matters. So many people here don’t. They’re stuck with their opinion whatever SD do. That’s what makes me sad. Whatever SD do they won’t be happy and that’s not good for SD or the fans of Brink… yet they’re still here bringing the game down.
/rant
[QUOTE=.Chris.;369686]Hey wolfnemesis75, can you give me your input on my map please, http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30482 It’s only a first version so be fair please.
It contains a forward spawn though, maybe this will make it a bad map? I would like to know your thoughts on this matter.
I also don’t have the defense spawn 5m away from the objective, would this cause problems for the map balance?[/QUOTE]
Looks good
With all respect, do you have any maps you designed yourself I could look at? You obviously have talent; I’d like to see some original work if it’s out there
[QUOTE=.Chris.;369686]Hey wolfnemesis75, can you give me your input on my map please, http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30482 It’s only a first version so be fair please.
It contains a forward spawn though, maybe this will make it a bad map? I would like to know your thoughts on this matter.
I also don’t have the defense spawn 5m away from the objective, would this cause problems for the map balance?[/QUOTE]
Looks like a cool map to me. Can you indicate where the forward spawns would be in relation to the objectives? I am assuming that there would be more than one objective. So where would the spawns be located?
Yeah sure, can view some of my work on my seriously outdated website complete with super low res images!!!
http://www.battle-of-wolken.co.uk/
(really need a new site)
[QUOTE=.Chris.;370009]Yeah sure, can view some of my work on my seriously outdated website complete with super low res images!!!
http://www.battle-of-wolken.co.uk/
(really need a new site)[/QUOTE]
Nice maps and I like the site! Like the good old days 
[QUOTE=.Chris.;370009]Yeah sure, can view some of my work on my seriously outdated website complete with super low res images!!!
http://www.battle-of-wolken.co.uk/
(really need a new site)[/QUOTE]
Cool map. Cool site. Good work.
But that’s the polar opposite of Brink design though. Do you understand what I am saying now? Every single map in Brink is asymmetrical AND agronomic design AND something comparable to Frank Lloyd Wright futuristic and organic Architectural and Industrial Design. Even the Refuel Hanger. Heck, there’s not even a single symmetrical element in either CC or Shipyard!
The design settings and environments in Brink emphasizes the use of sweeping curves, circles, ovals and acute and obtuse angles; right angles are almost completely avoided. Now, you balance out a map like that compared to ET which has right angles, flat planes, box-like construction and older, pre-modern, more traditional design principles with large open spaces.
Two different games. Two totally different design goals and challenges. Two different set of parameters ultimately, and add in the more CQC and you have much different recipe for gameplay and balance.
[QUOTE=Kurushi;369993]The problem is, the way some people go about their criticism on this board is appalling. Too many 2nd hand opinions churned out over and over. People here pretend they care about SD but they clearly are just spreading lies and misconceptions about the game - as well as good constructive feedback from others that probably wouldn’t be fixed without their feedback.
I am a fussy gamer and I’ve played PC FPS far too long to mention. I’ve played every SD game from launch (or before - woop look at me!) - It really baffles me how so many people don’t like Brink or think it’s as broke as they say it is. Yeah, things need changing and SD have been great at making changes so far (regardless of if it was right for the game to be released like that in the first place)
I can’t understand how so many long time fans like myself think Brink is such a disappointment compared to their older games. What I think it is, I have an open mind on matters. So many people here don’t. They’re stuck with their opinion whatever SD do. That’s what makes me sad. Whatever SD do they won’t be happy and that’s not good for SD or the fans of Brink… yet they’re still here bringing the game down.
/rant[/QUOTE]
Dude…I hear you. Some gamers go a little too far bringing the game down through their opinion. But this game did not fail because of them. This game has failed because of the devs decisions on things from the shooting, movement mechanics to the online structure of the game. No lobbies, comp mode being broken for like 2 months, etc. There are many more gamers that bring down other shooters but they sell well because people like them. Brink just wasn’t good at launch. It still needs work.
What makes it frustrating to gamers like myself who have played previous SD games is that we realize SD made those games and how fun they were. They already had the formula. Fast movement, accurate shooting, low damage, etc. They decided to go in a different direction. WHY? Now they are trying to backtrack. They should have done that from day 1. I still like Brink and I still play it but I will not just accept whatever is put out there. That is not how I live my life.
Apologies for responding only to the aside, but that would be awesome. or if once the bot was disabled, the first team to fully repair it could start escorting it in the appropriate direction…then the other team would have to disable + repair it to reverse things.