That’s not necessarily true, you’re imposing an ET ruleset on a game that isn’t ET.
The idea behind multi-stage maps is you can determine the winner by who finishes the most stages in the fastest time, as well as who sets the fastest time for the whole map if both teams manage all of them. You only need to play 3 or 5 maps if the maps are 1 or 2 stages and only last a few minutes at most. We shouldn’t be assuming ET rules apply here, this isn’t ET.
Only place where stages should have any consideration is a double full hold draw otherwise its simple you either win the map or you do not.
Agreed, but that doesn’t contradict what I said previously. If teams manage to complete all the objectives, great, but otherwise separate them by stages. The only reason we don’t do this in ET is because there are no stages in ET. If the map inherently provides multiple stages we don’t need to play multiple maps.
Or to put it another way, what’s the difference between 2 maps with 2 stages each and 1 map with 4 stages?
As long as the game times each stage and displays the results in a manner that can’t be contradicted I don’t see the problem playing 1 map with 4 stages that lasts 20 minutes, as opposed to 2 maps with 2 stages that last 10 minutes each.
Or to put it another way, what’s the difference between 2 maps with 2 stages each and 1 map with 4 stages?
Overlap between the stages. Which is quite important.
Man, phrasing in the gaming community is shocking as is, let’s not let that kind of thing spill over into these forums. People either make/take things way too personally or are just out to pick a fight.
I agree with the issue about choke points. But we’re still testing more important mechanics than overall map design and flow. Class mechanics alone are still far FAR from being balanced on the most rudimentary levels. Those mechanics could change the way we consider map-specific tactics.
If anything we need a greater concentration on objective incentives before we start analysing the potentially critical flaws in maps (though I’m not saying it’s ever too early to discuss map flow). ETQW had far more choke-free areas than the current maps, but because everyone knew where to focus their efforts it made it do-able, manageable. I’m still a supporter of the campaign based XP leveling system W:ET and ETQW had. ie, Battlesense / Firearms / Class Specific Skill unlocks that reset at the start of a new campaign. I think that did a lot to push people to play their classes properly, and thus made tactical considerations in any given map far more instinctual because your dedication to playing that class properly led to practical rewards. It also made for competitive thinking even amongst casual pub players a rewarding style of play. For those that had lazy fingers, they could at least have a chance to out-think the enemy.
I loved W:ET like crazy, but I want to play something new… something that is more challenging, tactically speaking, and open to even more possibilities. The W:ET maps were awesome, but we all reached a point where we knew all the places to place mines on every map for every type of enemy and every stage of the conflict… for both sides. Depth of tactical choice is what will make or break this game competitively.
You lads need to remember that you have a chance to help steer this game in the right direction while it is in alpha… the stage when this kind of input really does matter. Let’s leave the snide remarks and fatalistic appraisals to the Bioware and Blizzard communities.
It’s the alpha… focus on what SD are working on right now.
[QUOTE=Bloodbite;430432]Man, phrasing in the gaming community is shocking as is, let’s not let that kind of thing spill over into these forums. People either make/take things way too personally or are just out to pick a fight.
[/QUOTE]
Quite important. It´s very rare to find places where game design is discussed to such depth. Let´s not compromise that by getting sentimental over other people´s views.
[QUOTE=nailzor;430405]The reason I bring this up is because FPS games in competition are often played best of 3, best of 5 etc. So lets imagine a game was best of 5 which ended up 3-2. 5 rounds of stopwatch, estimate 15 minutes per side would be 2.5 hours of non-stop playing. Put some time between rounds for readying up etc, we start closing in on 3 hours for just 1 match (keep in mind this is accounting for 15 minute times, not full holds).
Kinda rough for matches to potentially take that long on multiple aspects of things, the teams that practice, the tournaments that occur, and the casting teams.[/QUOTE]Just thought I would point out that mobas have no problem with time length. Even a best of 3 in a moba could potentially be 3 hours long.
Not disagreeing or agreeing with you, just pointing out that mobas seem to not have a problem with this.
Same here. They’re too CoD like as things stand. I won’t rabbit on mentioning the same things over and over in detail, but no clear front line and too few choke points, too many side routes, and too many hiding/vantage points. Everything’s just too random and scrappy at the moment and teamplay, with pretty much everyone charging off and doing their own thing, suffers as a result.
Ah… well I meant RTCW and Halo since I’m familiar with them, didn’t really play ET much.
But I don’t think playing a single full SW on one map should determine a winner. Granted there are multiple stages which can determine winner as you pointed out, I’m a fan of BO3 - but going back to what slag pointed out - just too many objectives and his notes regarding maps - I definitely agree.
Quite the sensational title for the thread, but I was thinking the same thing regarding the maps. The maps definitely need better choke points with differing paths to mix things up for offense/defense.
This video really spurred those ideas in my head. You forget how great some of these maps were:
About maps; not sure if it’s just me, but does anyone else find the maps not to memorable?
Now, the comp game will not exist nowadays without the pub game - it just won’t attract enough players in the first place. There NEED to be maps tuned up for the pub play - and they should come first. After that, more of the SW maps w/o EVs for the comp scene may arrive. Look at Camden - such a fun map to play - plenty of ways to set up the defences, the crossfires and chokepoints are much more tuned for the comp play, the scene will definitely like that when it’s made public. We will then have 2 pub maps and 2 comp maps in stock - and more will follow.
Regarding the existing maps - I agree that the Chapel 2nd objective in Church and the Waterloo 2rd objective in the train station have to be changed. They are just no fun. As described above - too many crossfires and no way to setup defenses properly - you have to constantly be in motion to just survive (and by that I mean not dancing and stuff but virtually changing locations substantially).
So like Chris said - leave London Bridge and Whitechapel alone - they are fine with pub, multiple objectives is just right for that.
As for killing speed being too high - I personally like that, is pretty rewarding for aim. The problem here is however not the weapons damage but the dynamic spread/recoil of the weapons, which still can’t be compared to RTCW/ET. I personally think that there needs to be a promod (either SD-made or public-made) which would address the tune-up of the game settings for the comp scene.
I have suggested in a different topic but I will put my idea here as well regarding the maps.
So right now, I think there are too many ways to attack on certain maps. With this, I dont think it will be easy to set up a decent defence at all. I was thinking of blocking certain routes in competitve mode to try limit backrape ect. Similar to barriers used now on whitechapel. (where you cannot get the data cores until the EV is in position)
Just an idea, is it posible to have a comp config for servers and pub configs?
Definitely agree with you here potty. This has been a major topic of discussion amongst a lot of us playing. Still not sure if that’s the case, or we just haven’t figured out the meta strategy for the maps yet. It really does seem like there is so many different ways to go.
Watching that RtCW video brings back some solid memories man. @ 20s is what I’m talking about for a highlight reel. 3 frags and he only used about half a clip or so.
Personally I’m not a fan of escorts, too slow, buggy, boring, and some of the map objectives don’t even make sense from a military standpoint. Some of the maps have choke points that are too choked and others that are impossible to cover and it leads to an unenjoyable experience for both sides. I know it’s alpha and it needs tweaking but it’s hard trying to play test when you’re frustrated with how boring the game currently is. I like the game and I want to like it more but playing a medic on an EU server is about as enjoyable as me tossing my nuts in a food processor and letting it rip.
Edit: Something I really enjoyed about Blacklight Retribution was that all maps were completed within 7 - 10 minutes (for me it was 3-4.) That number is a little low but you can definitely SW in 10 - 12 minutes (good teams could speed completed in 4 - 5) and have a good game. 20 minutes is excessive.
needs more doc run maps, like adler,frosty and ice most intense objective mode
+1 these were by far the most exciting maps for spectators. picking up ev cores at points in the map does not offer near the excitement, we need flat out doc run maps.
I just hope people aren’t basing the TTK off medic. Medic isn’t a flat out kill-streak class in DB, and never will be- and it really should not be the best anyway. It is the best for maintaining the momentum of the team with heals/revives and does quite well in 1v1/2 situations. In fact medic is possibly the strongest 1v1 class considering that it can self-heal, allowing it to win most every engagement if all the player does is turn a corner and pack up. If you really want to frag a whole team then you should be playing a less self-sustaining class like soldier/fops/covert. Medic can still get fair kill-streaks, but most of the time they are clean-up streaks and that makes perfect sense. Also if you think back to other games where both teams had very capable players, the kill streaks only occurred in ideal circumstances such as flanking, doorways, small halls, etc. The same thing does happen in DB, however it is not nearly as consistent due to the weapon mechanics. We need to make sure we look at this situation as realistically as possible before jumping to conclusions just because we can’t run head on into a team and kill everyone.
Furthermore, DB needs to be able to support both pub and comp without major differences between them. Without public popularity there will forever be a dwindling competitive community, lack of interest in the game itself, and a guaranteed short life span. I feel like the game is currently on the right path, but just needs more polish and refinement. I don’t expect things to be exactly like what I am accustomed to, but that is fine with me as long as they make sense and are well structured. Competitive gaming these days is 99% throwing money at a game right at release and then having it fail immediately because the game hasn’t actually had the chance to be thoroughly tested or develop. Sadly that’s good enough for most comp players, but being no longer interested in prize related competition myself I want to give the game a chance before making any sudden conclusions that it’s not good or destined to fail. I do still require some inclination of potential for satisfaction, but I still am highly accepting towards change and new ideas even if it forces me to change my tactics or learn new things. I personally miss wanting to play a game for more than a few months, but short thrills is the way of the world these days.