Some of the good aspects of the overall map design (VIDEO)
Not to be rude, but the only time I would watch a gaming video for longer than 5-7 minutes is if it was an exciting match (just a tip because I know you plan on doing a lot of content).
Any longer than that and I can’t be bothered.
yea, I completely understand. This video was not intended to be watch by anyone other then people interested in the map design. Not really a “gaming video” at all 
Thanks for the tip though dude.
the maps in dirty bomb are dull. Then again there are no jump/launch pads, escalators, trampolines to reduce fall damage, high-speed walkways, underwater areas, rooftops, dome is the only map with a cellar, and a rooftop (not great in height). all the maps have little vertical height(flat geometry). Nothing in the maps really stick out as unique. I actually agree that Dome is one of the best maps, it needs more adjustments
and the gameplay on that map can be horrid if defense is able to hold attackers at first spawn.
Hopefully extraction gametype maps won’t disappoint
(and no I didn’t watch ur whole video, I skimmed through it)
I prefer to watch video’s of 20min or longer so I got time to drink my tea or something, each to their own.
Nice runthrough on Terminal. I agree it has the best combat hotspots (Underground for instance is just too linear so every match seems the same - only the first objective is really enjoyable for me). However the reasons you stated for Dome being bad is why I like it - the other maps are far too tight / focussed on CQC only. My main gripe with Dome (due to the fact its a blockout) is that I get lost a lot, especially trying to get to the 2nd objective after the first has blown. Terminal for a sniper is very fleeting, other maps have spots where you can have a sniper-war with an enemy sniper but not here on the whole, you have to snipe and run.
A good point about the moving spawns - this has always mystified me as I’m never sure where I’m going to spawn it makes it hard to plan routes / co-ordinate with your team :(.
I stop watching when you said that Terminal is the best map in DB …
Level design in DB is meh … still the number 1 issue of this game.
Replay value is really low on this small, claustrophobic, corridor based maps …
I love moving or capping spawns it was epic in ET.
I think there should be a forward spawn somewhere but they need to rethink it…
I always thought the dyno pump room should be a flag… its equal distance and it will make for epic battles… This gets rid of the gas…
You could then make the door going out a one way door to have enemys plant dyno. Just another level.
[QUOTE=BomBaKlaK;510322]I stop watching when you said that Terminal is the best map in DB …
Level design in DB is meh … still the number 1 issue of this game.
Replay value is really low on this small, claustrophobic, corridor based maps …[/QUOTE]
From my experience, it helps if you come up with solutions and ideas mate.
Unfortunately most people just blame the symptoms rather then the cause.
Certain aspects of the systems design make the maps much worse then they physically are.
Knowing the real issues will help improve the maps much more then just patching them to work.
You obviously hate the way the maps play mate, we get it.
Once again pointing it out does not really help…
Unless of course, you give REAL reasons to why.
IMO SD should hire the best custom mappers from RTCW and W:ET:
http://activegamer.net/et/maps/
These games had amazing custom maps for public play and for matches.
The current SD mapper guy made de_dust, which imo is irrelevant since that map isnt designed for objectives, classes, revives, etc.
I dont understand SD or DB.
I feel bad for just giving bad critique lately.
I dont know any more how to behave against DB since its so much in the air it seems. Im observing for now.
[QUOTE=JBRAA;510325]IMO SD should hire the best custom mappers from RTCW and W:ET:
http://activegamer.net/et/maps/
These games had amazing custom maps for public play and for matches.
The current SD mapper guy made de_dust, which imo is irrelevant since that map isnt designed for objectives, classes, revives, etc.
I dont understand SD or DB.
I feel bad for just giving bad critique lately.
I dont know any more how to behave against DB since its so much in the air it seems. Im observing for now.[/QUOTE]
There are more than 1 mapper & it’s not the guy who made de_dust. He’s working on ECHO
So like I said many times, my concern about the maps :
- Not enough side ways or tricks routes (Dome is on the good way for this)
- Corridor based maps
- Spawn to obj travel time is definitely to short
- Map scale is really small
- Objective design is not really fun, due to the obj location most of the time, or mechanic.
- Alternative obj need to give you a real advantage
- we need more Capturable spawn point, but due to the tiny map scale it’s not really possible, or not really interesting like in terminal.
- etc …
I’m not a level designer I’m just telling what I feel about the actual maps, dome got a much better scale but I don’t know maybe something more is needed like capturable spawn point or something. secondary Doors are not always interesting to blow or build.
- Not enough side ways or tricks routes (Dome is on the good way for this)
Of course its good at it… Dome was the first map designed with the wall jumps in mind. I would say just chill about about the tick routes and stuff as it is highly likely we will see some of these routes integrated into some of the older maps eventually.
- Corridor based maps
While I kind of understand what you are saying, you need to bare in mind that the movement system is also very linear and that due to the increased “realism” when it comes to artistic design the maps are cluttered. Having wide open spaces would mean running in the open for long periods of time. It would also look strange due to the lack of content, Previous games were able to avoid this feeling by the very abstract nature of the environments you fight in and the movement system. When it comes to Dirty Bomb, wide open areas would be a stark contrast to other areas. I feel once we have a art complete version of Dome this will become a little more apparent. I do however believe we could have wider area, just not likely areas as wide as in previous SD games.
- Spawn to obj travel time is definitely to short
Actually this is a problem I have with the maps also. However, its not exactly for the reasons you mention…
My issue is the time to travel to the objectives is too short AND the time to travel to the action is too long.
Basically one of my core issues with the game in general is that you fight AT the objective and not BETWEEN the attackers spawn and objective. Hopefully this will be fixed in future maps but I really do not know what you could do about this currently without just making a longer respawn time and empty sections of boring map to run though.
- Objective design is not really fun, most due to the obj location most of the time.
I believe the locations are ok and tweakable in mostly.
However, I agree that the objectives themselves are shallow and boring but that is not a map design issue.
- Alternative obj need to give you a real advantage
Again, this is not directly a map design issue and would be fixed via systems, mechanics or changes.
More importantly than a “REAL ADVANTAGE” I believe that the objectives need to be desirable for BOTH the attackers and defenders. The should be more of a nudge to the balance rather then a “Do the secondary then do the primary” because if that is the cause the secondary for all intents and purpose may as well be classed as a primary. The secondaries should CHANGE the fight more then CHANGE the balance.
- we need more Capturable spawn point, but due to the tiny map scale it’s not really possible.
This is an example of feedback without reasoning… WHY do we need more procurable spawn points?
Is it because…
1, They are fun to fight over,
2, At a certain point the Attackers need a advantage,
3, Make use of under used sections of the maps,
Saying it how you say it would be like me saying… “The maps need more Dub Step!”
Also this kind of feedback needs to be given for a certain section of a map.
For the whole game at once it makes no sense.
My thoughts on Terminal… and more to come… and yes these actually have discernible reason behind them too lol.
The issue with maps is simple from my POV, but it’s not always a size issue. Maps play in an overly repetitive linear fashion for some very obvious reasons.
(1) You typically only have 3 main routes that are in such close proximity/visibility to one another that they become redundant, which then lead into a big cluster fudge of crossfires.
(2) There’s an incredibly thin connection between mercs and maps, meaning strategy is more about busting your head against the same defense over and over until it breaks.
(3) There’s no motivation for aggression or dynamic strategy, which is why a competitive game always has people playing the same spots and never really doing anything differently or having to for that matter. There’s rarely a surprise strategy or anything interesting that’s related to the map.
(4) Defenders tend to have overly biased access to the obj from spawn and attackers can’t properly defend the obj once control is seized.
Why do I think forward spawns are necessary in duality? They offer a huge facilitation of dynamic map flow, where there’s real reward/punishment/risk involved in map control. Do you cap the enemy forward and delay their pushes? Do you protect your own forward and keep reinforcements coming quick? Do you ignore both and just focus on the objective? It’s all about offering real dynamic progression during a game, where strategical decisions regarding your teams momentum are always going to be more than the kill. Map control can swing back and forth throughout a game and instead of spending 5minutes breaking a choke and never fighting there again, you’d potentially be utilizing the entire map to the very end. You get interesting strategies panning out, where there’s factors of measurable risk/reward for over-extending or camping. Mistakes get made and big plays can happen. Maps suddenly become that much more a part of the game.
The other part of it is opening more segregated side objective routes or momentum oriented side-objectives. A perfect cross-fire needs a weak spot. A solid defense should still be on its toes for the unexpected or keeping an eye out for an objective sneak. I’d go as far as to limit the side-objectives to specific archetypes as well, which would further define merc roles in the map strategy. If you desperately need an extra route opened/closed your going to do all you can to get that guy on the job and keep them safe till it’s done. Plus if you’re lacking in a role, that’s a potential route lost or another you now need to worry about defending.
Overall what these do is increase the dynamism of how maps might play out, which is in my opinion the core of the map issue and that won’t be fixed with just layout. Not to mention these systems can impact the maps in a very big way without requiring drastic redesigns either. I think it’s the best solution to salvaging current maps at this point.
Forward spawns can be considered side-objectives for all purposes.
Objective-based gameplay works best if teams can control each other’s movement by holding tactical points. This is done through making them fight over bottle-necks. An open map with lots of side routes would be random and thus boring. Just relying on bottlenecks however, creates corridor fighting and turns the maps in meat-grinders. Equally boring.
Side objectives solve this dilemma by allowing teams to invest effort and time to modify a map towards further openness. It solves the issue of entirely open maps due to the way side objectives communicate towards the defenders. Defenders know what possibilities the attackers have at any time. They know where they can put their tactical resources to the best effect.
Ultimately what made W:ET and ETQW stand so far above other shoots was the modularity of the maps. Teams weren’t fighting for that final objective, they were fighting overthe capacity to shape the map according to their agenda.
Brink had side-objectives, but they were mostly faux-main objectives due to being situated mostly in the main routes and mostly serving as hurdles rather than opportunities for the attackers.
ETQW was beautiful in the way the open terrain allowed for deployables, creating whole new side objectives on their own. That’s what made every match entirely different from the last match.
DB currently has a few classic side objectives, token deployables and everything else is static.
I want extreme map modularity. That means not just the ability to create side routes, but also objects that respond differently to merc abilities. A objective shouldn’t just be constructable and destroyable. It should be reinforcable, explodable, hackable and burnable. Mercs need to start shaping the map around them again.
“Extreme Modularity” should be DB’s “SMART” when it comes to marketing. An environment where players fight to set London to their hand.
Actually Dome was around way before long jumps and wall jumps.
Regardless, I feel the first stage CAN be good on Terminal. The defending teams spawn needs cover removing and their spawn moved back about 3-4 more seconds away from the objective. The route to defend is too easy on them and they will always have the advantage in equal fights for now.
The back stage however, I feel has got a nice balance to it. It would be nice to have 2 selectable spawns for the attackers to access both routes easier and split the defense a little more.