Dynamic Paths In A CP Map

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by StoneFrog, May 19, 2009.

  1. StoneFrog

    StoneFrog L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    395
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    Well, still hammering away at cp_railstop. One thing I've come to realize is how I have buildings on the East and West ends of my map (in the neutral area) that serve little purpose beyond housing the third-tier resupply rooms, despite the fact they take up a fair chunk of the map and have enough pathways in themselves to possibly house their own Control Points!

    My map's points are layed out in sort of an S-like fashion, similar to badlands. However, at this time, it lacks (the presence of, as well as my intention of placing) the pathway that runs down the middle of the map (similar to the trench in badlands). As a result, those buildings on the sides are kind of "out of the way" of the standard gameplay flow.

    Rather than compromise much of my pre-existing level geometry and work on more paths, I have an idea. The final CPs are somewhat closer to the center of the map (in terms of the Y-axis) so perhaps, once the second-to-last CPs are captured, a door or two could open up by those side buildings to allow additional pathways to the final points, a la cp_steel.

    Pros
    • More diversity in attacker paths.
    • Better player circulation overall.
    • Makes it easier to capture the final point, compared to the massive chokepoints frequently encountered near the end of a match.
    • Adds a twist to gameplay. Engineers may have placed their sentry guns in certain locations in anticipation of the attackers coming one way, when in fact they must now be wary of the additional routes at their disposal.

    Cons
    • May be hard to grasp at first for new players.
    • Adds a twist to gameplay (see under "pros"). This can help and hurt if the team under attack is going full defense in one locaiton, only to lose the game due to a bum rushing Scout coming from the totally opposite direction.

    What say you?
     
  2. The Political Gamer

    aa The Political Gamer

    Messages:
    4,468
    Positive Ratings:
    1,684
    Do it, I am kinda getting bored of the same layout for the 5-cp maps. This could really change things up.
     
  3. grazr

    aa grazr Old Man Mutant Ninja Turtle

    Messages:
    5,436
    Positive Ratings:
    3,570
    Sounds like it's probably a good idea, but only playtesting will get you your answers.

    A couple times i've posted up enquiries like this, only to make my mind up after writing down the pro's and con's. He he.
     
  4. StoneFrog

    StoneFrog L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    395
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    Hah, as I was typing out the cons I thought, "damnit, I need more cons so it looks like I genuinely need insight from the other members!" :p

    Will probably give it a shot.
     
  5. Schmoe

    Schmoe L2: Junior Member

    Messages:
    60
    Positive Ratings:
    1
    As long as the alternate paths are somehow identifiable to the players at both ends, then it should be OK. In other words, if I go left I should eventually see the path if I had gone right and be able to understand it is pointing back to where I came from.

    You should design the map so players don't accidentally backtrack.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
  6. StoneFrog

    StoneFrog L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    395
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    I may make the alternate paths one way (unless one deliberately does something to get back to them, in which case I'm sure they'd be aware it's not the right way for the most part) like the attackers' starting tunnels in gravelpit.
     
  7. uma plata

    uma plata L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    298
    Positive Ratings:
    86
    The big question I see is how is a team pushed back to their final point going to be able to come back?

    If the new path opens a new front on the final assault, could steamroll easy...
     
  8. StoneFrog

    StoneFrog L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    395
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    Not sure. On one hand I want to prevent the immense boredom that comes from the endgame of cp_well when there's a massive SentryColony(TM) around the last point and nobody seems to have enough initiative to break through. On the other, I don't want the defenders losing their points faster than the announcer can finish telling them they're, well, losing their points - as there is no fun in that.

    The main intent of the routes right now are to open up the map more and give the side buildings more purpose.
     
  9. Mar

    Mar Banned

    Messages:
    607
    Positive Ratings:
    63
    try it, but be warned, in any 5 cp push map there will be tons of times where the defense gives up the 2nd point so they can fall back and protect the last. This could be a big pain in the ass, especially if you need to stickie the point up and and get your medic in place. Once you get the map working I would love to give you a sexy comp playtest of it.

    BTW, for the last point of cp_well get a soldier, demo and medic to go upstairs and they will decimate any sentry. The last point is designed to be too big for sentries to lock it down, so use both sides and go upstairs.
     
  10. Sirusblk

    Sirusblk L1: Registered

    Messages:
    2
    Positive Ratings:
    0
    First off, I don't think it would be hard to grasp for new players as long as signs pop up and tell you where to go. My dad (not an FPS player at all) get's lost on 2fort, but the signs that pop up many maps are a saving grace. Have those pop up dynamically and it won't be a problem.

    Second, you'll need choke points for sure no matter what the route. I think the best solution is to keep the cap points themselves somewhat choke points and be careful not to keep them too open.

    I'd recommend taking a heavy look at tc_hydro. It has a lot of the features you're looking for. The points themselves are designed to have most of the action, and there's usually a choke point in between no matter what route is chosen.