Good Gravelpit-Style CP Layouts?

Discussion in 'Mapping Questions & Discussion' started by StoneFrog, Mar 17, 2009.

  1. StoneFrog

    StoneFrog L6: Sharp Member

    Messages:
    395
    Positive Ratings:
    81
    I was wondering if anybody can think of any good Control Point layouts for Gravelpit-style maps, perhaps ones using more than three points? Ones I had in mind:

    A & B -> C & D -> E
    This would work, but it may be too sloppy for defenders.

    A -> B and C -> D, Converge At E
    This'd be interesting, dividing defenders into two contingents that will focus on "their side" of the map.

    A & B -> C -> D
    This one would be interesting, and offset all the complaints defenders get about having to jump to their last point on short notice and its associated quick capture time. Still, I don't know if attackers would want to stick together and focus on a linear point...twice.

    A -> B & C -> D
    I was liking this one as it gives a chance for attackers to reorganize halfway through, although starting the map with one control point will just make it all Dustbowl spammy.
     
  2. YM

    aa YM LVL100 YM

    Messages:
    7,099
    Positive Ratings:
    5,739
    A & B -> C works well ;)
    Me and nine discussed alternatives before starting work on Furnace Creek and we decided that Valve made gravelpit the way it is for a reason.
     
  3. Rexy

    aa Rexy The Kwisatz Haderach

    Messages:
    1,795
    Positive Ratings:
    2,366
    ...or they used HAX!
     
  4. GrimGriz

    GrimGriz L10: Glamorous Member

    Messages:
    774
    Positive Ratings:
    133
    Abc
    de
    f
     
  5. HojoTheGreat

    HojoTheGreat L5: Dapper Member

    Messages:
    206
    Positive Ratings:
    34
    Matterhorn follows a A -> B -> C & D & E layout.

    It's a bit messy, as it takes time for Red to coordinate to set up a solid defense anywhere. The main problem is the learning curve since, much like Steel, the points are spread out from the spawn and because reacting to defend quickly requires knowing the layout well, the first few rounds can get pretty messy.

    A & B -> C is certainly the cleanest of the layouts, however the issue is that I have yet to see a layout that deviates from the triangle formation. Matterhorn originally came about from the idea of STACKING the points on different levels, rather than having them all horizontally similar. Maybe I'll go back and try that out again...
     
  6. Ravidge

    aa Ravidge Grand Vizier

    Messages:
    1,544
    Positive Ratings:
    2,492
    When making a gravel pit styled map, with the A & B -> C setup. You will realize that its VERY though to arrange the control points in any other way than gravel pit already does. Because that layout is very well planned. Just look at how close everything is, even the slow classes only have a few seconds of travel time to get anywhere. So the further you stray from that mold just to make your map special, the more design flaws you will find in your creation :)

    I do approve of creativity and experiments with layout and CP placement, but adding more control points could easily make it too complex. And it will take a lot of effort to make that work. But it's certainly possible, Steel did it.
     
  7. Sgt Frag

    Sgt Frag L14: Epic Member

    Messages:
    1,443
    Positive Ratings:
    294
    Yeah, it would be pretty tough to make a 3 point cap anything BUT a triangle if you follow an a, b then c format.

    Other wise the players would always cap the closest point first (the only other option is in a line).

    Unfortunately it does reallly lend itself to a small variety in map design. Adding more points in different unlock configs is the only real way to change it up. All of these maps (Broma, Silvertrail, Furnace Creek) feel somewhat familiar, but that's not really a bad thing, players always know what to do, they just have to learn the intricacies of the map itself.