sry but whitechapel doesnt work

(attack) #41

it arent that big changes a tunnel is made in lets say maybe 2 hours

in one day you could improve the full first stage ,without script maybe.

i would try it by myseld but as its not possible :confused:

(montheponies) #42

You have to be careful about making judgements on maps based upon a PUG. Pretty much any map can be abused if the teams are too far apart, which is why you would expect competitive matches to be paired up based upon team performance, low, mid or high. This goes as much for Extraction as it did back in the day for RTCW.

I think the bigger and more frequently mentioned problem, is overall map length - but weā€™ve talked about truncated maps (like Trainyard/Camden) lots already.

(attack) #43

[QUOTE=montheponies;470554]You have to be careful about making judgements on maps based upon a PUG. Pretty much any map can be abused if the teams are too far apart, which is why you would expect competitive matches to be paired up based upon team performance, low, mid or high. This goes as much for Extraction as it did back in the day for RTCW.

I think the bigger and more frequently mentioned problem, is overall map length - but weā€™ve talked about truncated maps (like Trainyard/Camden) lots already.[/QUOTE]

as i played in a team which had high and lowskill , i definitly know how skill can be a difference .
but it is not the skill difference.maybe it looks balanced for you because you are a very good aimer idk.
i would say that i got an eye for unbalanced maps over the years and this is one .
skill is a point but mapdesign an other.
as example braundorf :ye you could get raped at maindoor, but it never feeled like on this map ,where you have no chance of moving without get raped from all sides .
you CANT create a map which has one road where 16 players have to cross

(trickykungfu) #44

[QUOTE=montheponies;470554]You have to be careful about making judgements on maps based upon a PUG. Pretty much any map can be abused if the teams are too far apart, which is why you would expect competitive matches to be paired up based upon team performance, low, mid or high. This goes as much for Extraction as it did back in the day for RTCW.

I think the bigger and more frequently mentioned problem, is overall map length - but weā€™ve talked about truncated maps (like Trainyard/Camden) lots already.[/QUOTE]

we played it vs NA and it always ends up in a messā€¦

(attack) #45

like in the newsroom sayed
ā€œFirst step in a problem is recognizing there is oneā€

(ailmanki) #46

Having looked at very lots of maps, since I manage a server and had to decide - put this map in? Not? Fix first some script, add new spawns? Change command mapā€¦ and yes I did all that for some maps.

White Chapel, has multiple problems. The attackers can get flanked by the defenders at start. Which is not possible the other way around. Unless the defenders are much to weak.
The middle part of the map, where you have to get those objectives, it feels very linear, not much room for error or fun.

The liftā€¦ ok for the x100 time. Either let the EV pass the road right of it, or let us destroy the lift, so that the EV falls down.
This objective makes - ZERO - sense. None at all.

The last objective, dunno whats wrong with, after that lift I think my brains stops questioning and accepts it - that it is stupid.

(attack) #47

[QUOTE=ailmanki;470559]
The last objective, dunno whats wrong with, after that lift I think my brains stops questioning and accepts it - that it is stupid.[/QUOTE]
remove it an let it end like on LB .(simply drive the tank to a certain point)!

(ailmanki) #48

Dunno, I am not sure if there even is a problem with the last objective. Could be good. Imho get rid of the lift ā€¦ rather then that last objective.

(attack) #49

i would like to hear SD about it

(attack) #50

andlike always ignored by SD

(Smooth) #51

I sincerely beg your forgiveness for not replying within the 3 hour time limit.

We will be making changes to improve Whitechapel (amongst other levels) but I canā€™t say exactly what these changes are going to be because theyā€™ll all need to be tested and iterated upon. Iā€™m also not a level designer :tongue:

(attack) #52

[QUOTE=Smooth;470749]I sincerely beg your forgiveness for not replying within the 3 hour time limit.

We will be making changes to improve Whitechapel (amongst other levels) but I canā€™t say exactly what these changes are going to be because theyā€™ll all need to be tested and iterated upon. Iā€™m also not a level designer :tongue:[/QUOTE]
ty for the answer :smiley:
i dont want to be respectless but why we have the same problems since alpha start(sry but i kind of frustrated)
why not simply write the changes that are planed.
so we can be sure that there is coming

(attack) #53

we played today it was sure it wasnt balanced iz was pure spam. toomic can explain it to you SD.

so i found a other possible tunnelway.sry for the bad pick but no whitechapel currently running.(blue circle)

Whitechapel 9.jpg1440Ɨ900 317 KB

(Violator) #54

I actually like the first objective on WC now (from a pub point of view), its still a bit ā€˜corridooryā€™ but there are 3 ways to attack (left steps, down tā€™middle or bell room). There has been the odd spawncamp by def if the teams are imba, but the map usually sees through to the end. The corner bottleneck actually makes for some good firefights IMHO and is the most fun part of the map for me. By the time the EV is round the corner though, it is actually pretty hard for def to stop it.

Second objective - what I miss is the good oleā€™ fights in the chapel itself - its a ghosttown now as the combat is now the death-run from the EV to the chapel (as 1-800-NOTHING mentioned) which seems to have put paid to it (def rarely make it into the chapel at all, and if they do its not usually enough to stop someone with the docs). You may get the odd engie camping def in there but thats about it.

Lifts obj - I think this does still drag out a bit. The capped stations need to boost the lift speed a lot more imho, it also gets to a point where def are spawncamped at the EV firing spot.

Last obj - this is still too chaotic (esp. with the side-door noclip bug), and either ends up as a rush-win for attack or a meatgrind in the left-hand route to the obj. Attack will eventually push to a spawncamp position (if they donā€™t cap the docs before def can respawn) or get bogged down at the EV gate. The roof route has some possibilities but you are still sniper fodder as there is not a lot of cover up there.

(iwound) #55

the only issues i have with this level are:
1: not enough defending inside of the chapel <- players fault. in part due to LOS from defence spawn.
2: Capping the objective points. I prefered the tool action win. Although This type of capping
would be nice in a separate dominate game mode where each point is the focus. Iā€™m
just not feeling it here.
3: I enjoy this map. i have spoken!

(DarkangelUK) #56

The only part that annoys me is the speed the lift descends with the EV on it, itā€™s absolutely unrealistically painfully artificially slow that I just get annoyed looking at it.

(attack) #57

all in our ts have said it and its that as soon as you have to escort the tank around the corner and the complete first escort stage is pure spam .(we played 5o5) .
niko had 56 kills as defence.
sry but there have to be changes its simply not fun if the enemy repairs tank and all spam everythink on the tank or shoot him emidiatly down.
8on8 on a public without ff will result in a rly frustrating scenario if teams uneven

i have to say we have played camden too and this map was rly fun and very close .(best match in this game so far :P)
teams were realy even only niko had showed his finnish humanaimbotskills :smiley: and potty i hate your spawnairstrikes :smiley:
last i have to sayi like the idea with the lift

(DB Genome editor) #58

There is a known bug that the MG shield in the chapel does not deploy properly, but has this ever worked? Just curious how much of an impact it could have on the defense of the chapel. For instance, if it gave enough cover against long range shots, a single player might be able hold the main entrance by himself, forcing the attackers to use the side entrance or coordinated rushes on both levels of the main entrance.