Made by Arnold
did you have to restrict rocketjumping everywhere in between 3-2? :[
I did enjoy watching the demo, although I have never ever seen that much negativity because a 5cp stalemated for half an hour on a public.
That being said comp does enjoy this version a lot better than any previous versions and since i'm mapping for comp and not for pubbers that complain when a map goes back and forth and has fights on middle cp instead of fights at choke and nearly none on or around the cp itself, it's not really my concern.
Maybe I'm bitter but the feedback just seemed a tiny bit childish during a custom map test. especially considering they started to rtv. Why is it even possible to rtv?
RTV was added to the tf2m server for the april fools lolgameday. It's proved occasionally useful for skipping bad or broken maps, or simply signalling to the host that all is not well.
The versions before used to be a bit too open and empty around mid which I see you have changed, and my first reaction was to say it's a lot better, but it really wasn't because instead of too big and open it's now too small and cramped. Dunno about last, never seen it properly contested.
When you make a map for only 6v6 chances are it's gonna be too small and spammy for even Highlander, which is honestly what I think this has become. Granted I haven't played it more than twice yet but all the corridors are so long and small I foresee spamming grenades and rockets as being the best strategy - half the time there's not even a way to dodge. Hell Snipers might even genuinely want to switch to Huntsman.
That's how it felt. Maybe it's just the detailing i.e. its super high density of detail and high contrast that cause this. Also the wooden walls on last looked out of place. http://i.imgur.com/SYzRe.jpg this stairs room really is epitomic of all the parts of this map I dislike. Too small and fiddly, ramp and stairs mixed (which is fine sometimes but still attracts attention), random column blocking players even more, inside super dark compared to bright outside.
Burnout. It didn't really stalemate either iirc, it was more that everyone was pushing all the time and points were changing hands, but no one was getting anywhere.
If your map is a failure for play in anything other than 6v6 play, then you've fucked up, pretty massively. Don't pull this, "oh, it's for comp so fuck pubbies", bullshit here. If pubs are not your concern, then why are you even posting it here, and testing it here.
If the issues we experienced when testing it are this magical once in a lifetime issue that was a total freak occurrence, then you can go ahead and do nothing, but if that's not the case, then actually fix the map, or don't bother posting about it here, if it's, "only for comp".
Hold on a second selentic, you are just saying i fucked up. But like you said the points were changing hands and in comparison to the way normal 5cp maps play on a public I'd say that's a pretty good thing. The part that does bother me however is that public players play a map for the first time and judge based on their single experience where they blindlessly die in chokepoints and find the map confusing because it's new to them and therefore not make optimal use of healthpacks and flanking routes.
I let the map run in gameday because it hasn't in ages and I like any feedback, but it doesn't warrant the negativity it had received during gameday.
It's actually not bullshit that I would say that comp doesn't complain about said issues because at least comp plays it more than once and has a more solid understanding of balance.
I also don't understand why you feel the need to defend the public testing so far as gameplay is concerned public hardly plays 5cp for exactly that reason. At least the lower skill level players don't.
And also this forum is a mapmaking forum. not a map for public forum.
Random negativity just sometimes happens. And if you balance for comp, for pub some things will simply not work as well. Regarding those, you just need to ignore it, and regret ignoring it.
I don't mind the random pub players giving negative feedback I was just surprised that even the regulars were having such negative reactions towards the map. Considering we are all mappers the feedback should be constructive.
They weren't "random pubbers". Well, not all of them. At least a half dozen of the people playing that map were brought in by invite from Crash. They're veteran TF2ers, and who in my experience are just as good at anyone at playtesting a map.. especially when it's a proper 12v12 game.
I've run enough alpha maps past these guys that when they say a map isn't fun, I listen.
Don't take this as me getting mad, because I'm not. I'm just trying to give some context to the things you heard in the voice chat. The feedback heard in the demo may come off as overly harsh, but you should realize we were all in the process of playing a high pressure game and weren't too concerned about being polite. Everyone seemed to voicing the same concerns more or less.. so if you want the map to be fun for 12v12, you may want to take a breather, step back, and read the feedback with a more impartial view.
The problem is that the feedback has no use to me. I will not change the map to be more open because it has been in the past. I participate most gamedays and I know that feedback overall isn't that negative not even towards really bad alpha maps.
I also don't understand why you are treating me like a kid throwing a fit. I am just wishing players and especially mappers would provide more toughtful feedback other than saying it stalemates when it doesn't even stalemate.
so did it stalemate or not
Except it did stalemate? We played the map for what, 30 minutes? And no one ever won the match.
The map certainly isn't bad, far from it. It has some neat geometry and the fighting is pretty fun. It just didn't seem like a team controlling 4 points had enough of an advantage to make a push on the last point.. the losing team was able to recover every single time.
Was it unfamiliarity with the map? Maybe. Was it the teams? Maybe. Is it a map problem? Maybe.
Perhaps the solution is to give it more 12v12 testing and see if any kind of patterns develop.
Exactly the kind of thought process I'd like to see more of xzzy, it just bothered me that during a maptest you'd be so quick to judge a map. I'd also like to add that croissant is being played on several publics with 24 players and it doesn't "stalemate" like it did during the gameday.
It's also funny to note that the last control point is the easiest to push in the hands of comp players. I don't understand how player density (both sides) could have such an impact. I have seen highlander matches where the biggest complaint was re-taking cp2.
All on the same version of croissant.
That's not what I said. Key word: if.
While I can't speak for everyone, this wasn't my first time on the map. First time on this version, sure, but the layout was still more or less the same from what I could see!
If you don't want to hear the results of the map test if they're negative and no one had a good time, why are you asking for feedback?
I never said it was, I was saying that your writing off of the pub result on the sole basis of, "well it plays fine in comp", was bullshit. You're more than welcome to submit it again, and see if it plays differently, and then maybe we can deliver more comprehensive feedback, but complaining we only played it once, and didn't like it that one time doesn't really change anything.
Both are valuable, while I too would put a fair bit more weight on comp play and feedback, that doesn't make the way it plays in pubs irrelevant.
Populated almost entirely by pubbies, who are going to give you pubbie feedback
To be quite honest, the way it looks to me, is that you're just sitting here complaining about how no one had fun playing your map, and instead of trying to find out why everyone responded negatively and solve any potential issues, you're going on about how pubbies just don't know anything about the game or map.
After reviewing the demo to see what all the fuss is about, I've came to conclusion that all the fuss is for nothing.
Well you shouldn't create fuss where there is none. I am not mad, all I am trying to say is that I felt the negative feedback was ungrounded and that I didn't expect it to happen on a tf2maps gameday. I am not and was not mad in any case.
Unfortunately as of late that's how the gameday's have been. People seem to be hardwired from feedbacking so many similar problems that all have the same solution that they jump to conclusions and make assumptions every time something odd comes up. At the end of the day it's up to you to observe and conclude whether the feedback is nonsensical, particularly if you have the map being run in several other server rotations. Not that you didn't know that already.
We're gonna have to do something about peoples attitudes during our testing sessions i think.
Make everyone play finalway and other "bad" maps for a few days. That'll do it.
"Unkind" feedback does still have its uses though. Just have to develop a thick skin and look for patterns. If one guy says the location of a health pack is "terrible", you can probably ignore it because the complaint was probably triggered by him geting worked over by a scout and having a frustrating death. But if a dozen people say the same thing over a couple weeks of play testing, then perhaps it's time to look at the problem.
Anecdote time: there have been a few places on stoneyridge where the exact same spot on the map gets completely opposite reactions from players. Person A says there's not enough routes to get to some location, then minutes later Person B claims there's too many routes.
When you get conflicting feedback, I interpret it as you being close to perfect. :thumbup:
That's not how the gamedays have been in my experience. The only maps I remember that really got somewhat consistent negative feedback were gloryhole, croissant and overcast. For example lyra, hella, clifftop, rust, volcanic are all at least tolerated if not liked.
Sunday's gameday had stoneyridge, croissant, hella, rust and harbour and was one of the better ones we had lately in fact.
All that said this is a release candidate so feedback is gonna be more pronounced than usual. Because people care and like it enough to want it to be better.
But whatever, we gotta play it like 10 more times to prove if those really are trends or an unfortunate occurrence. And that's another problem really - I hadn't seen the map in months. First some early betas where everything was still open, and now the rc2. Now I'm not super active but how much pub testing did you really get?
Let's not censor and ban people again for giving negative feedback. I thought we'd gotten over this.
Besides if you know what you're doing the only feedback you need is to see how the players actually played.
Separate names with a comma.