to the level designers

(Valdez) #1

I know we only have a small sample of the maps so far but I think I am seeing a few issues. Maybe I am mistaken but I believe dirty bomb is being designed for 5v5 player size. The maps currently seem to have too many ways to attempt to defend with only 5 defenders, you also cant see in advance which way the attackers would be coming from. This is why more of an open style map would be important. The map does not need to be completely open, but needs to have points of openness to see where the attackers would be coming from.

The other issue I see, are the spawn times. The spawns times currently would never allow your defense to get set back up. Obviously in a competitive format you want to assign spots to play on defense like a 3/2 split or whatever. Lets just say 4 out of your 5 guys die off but 1 guy remains and holds off the attack, I am pretty sure the way the spawns times are now, the attackers would almost beat the defenders to their defensive spots. If this is not the case, it still does not allow your team enough time to comfortably get setup, should be at least a 10 second comfort zone when you get to your spot. Basically you shut down first wave, then get to your spots and have 10 secs of breathing room once you are there… then the second wave from the attackers arrives. Also with waves that encourages team play, if you can beat or almost beat the defenders to their spots, that encourages ffa. Maybe this does not exactly relate to the level designers but then again rather than adjusting spawn times they can adjust spawn locations.

I cant say that I have fully tested any of this. We would need at least two organized teams to truly test this kind of stuff.

(stealth6) #2

I think the defenders have slightly shorter routes than the attackers, I tried it a few times on maps I doubted. Problem is at some stages the defenders need to fallback as soon as they loose their objective, but don’t.

For instance on LB once the EV has been stolen defenders need to fallback ASAP and build the first barricade, but instead they tend to hang around and do from fragging and die. This allows the attackers to beat the defenders to the first barricade.

Same thing when the EV blows up the building, defenders should immediately fall back to defensive position within the building, but generally hang around in the front allowing the attackers to plow down the middle and grab the objectives with little resistance.
Same thing when they get the last power node to the EV in LB (although the defenders are obstructed by the attackers spawn here)

Same thing on waterloo once the gate has been blown, defenders should fall back to the terminal (attackers can easily push this stage if they all rush 1 direction, because the defense generally splits for both routes, instead of just waiting at the terminal)

I’d really like to get some EU pugs going so we can actually do some real tactics.

Oh, but the differences in distance for both teams isn’t 10 seconds :D, more like 1-3s?

As for spawntimes, those could probably be adjusted. I have no idea how they work atm, doesn’t seem to be wave spawning like previous titles. (For example I was selfkilling a lot one time and it kept giving me a 12 second spawntime… a bit too frequently for coincidence)

(j4b) #3

Maybe its possible to bar the ways in 5v5 setting. similar the ways are opened ore closed in TDM.

(INF3RN0) #4

Faster access for defenders, but longer spawn times as well. Look at the ETQW map formula of 3 levels of defense and a forward spawn for optional fighting- laid out in a usually horizontal fashion. This encouraged the full map to be utilized. See Brink for the failure to recognize how this system originally worked.

(Humate) #5

^werd

In addition to spawn locations and spawn times…

The combat system in DB favours stacked/grouped attacks over split attacks.
In ETQW however its the opposite, it favours individual skill a bit more.
You can afford to set up a split defence in ETQW knowing 1 player can take on 3 or 4 players.
Whereas in DB, if you set up a split defence its too easy to break through, if you have numbers.

(potty200) #6

One thing I do find with current maps is I think there are way too many way to the objective. Too hard to defend if you have 5 people rushing one/two people.

(INF3RN0) #7

This has not been the case in pugs with high level players.

(Anti) #8

To be fair, and I have watched some of the PUGs, no matter how ‘high level’ the players are we’re yet to have anything of the level of team work of a proper clan match being played, nor have we had any kind of meta game evolution for each map.

I certainly share potty’s concern that the maps lack solid front lines, provide too many routes to attack and force defenders to camp on the objectives themselves rather than being able to choose certain choke points to cover.

(Dthy) #9

I think this is just because we are still getting used to the game and any clans some of us are currently in aren’t in the closed alpha, so we can’t make super secret 1337 tactics. :smiley:

(Anti) #10

Oh yea I get that, not criticizing, just pointing out that I wouldn’t depend on them for any real knowledge of how 5v5 will play.

(Dthy) #11

Just a case of only time will tell I guess :smiley:

(potty200) #12

Would it be possible on certain maps to block a few routes on the maps to prevent having weak attacks. By this I mean on Clan Match server settings. So its open on servers unless you have set a setting to say “allow_all_paths 1” ? The only thing I can think of being similar to this would be Fueldump in Enemy territory. It cuts out the first half of the map in compatition mode so avoid a stalemate at the first bride. But on publics its the whole map and it flows better without tactics.

(INF3RN0) #13

I was mostly referring to some early scrims that I don’t think you got a chance to watch (not the pugs), which involved a lot of random offensive attempts. Although we weren’t really professional teams (just gaming friends) it was still very easy to cover the objective and full hold without much of a problem. LB for example completely revolved around holding the bridge on 1st objective for example, even though there were multiple routes to the obj itself. The overall lack of surprise attack routes sort of makes it easy to force fights in places you want, and I am almost sure that when some real pro teams get in to test they won’t be complaining about there being too many routes to obj. Also to note is that currently there’s very little reason to ever push out beyond the obj due to lack of forwards/side objs and map design (lack of that 3 zones of defense), so that is more of the reason why people would choose to camp a lot of the objectives. Will have to wait and see though.