And you forgot about 1 of the contest winner maps which is MvM
.Innovation doesnt allways mean making completely new modes, its also possible by reinventing modes from existing features. And it can be as simple as cp_steel. And in some cases it doesnt even need a new gamemode. The map layout can be innovative on its own aswell.
That as mapper you have to guide players allways has to remain, people want to be able to learn the map fast. In rd_ valve is capable of making a new hud which gave them the power to innovate whil not confusing players of what to do, they instantly see it on the hud when they did the objective.
Only because everyone has the map they get lots of feedback, but asking 1 player to try to describe the map flow can be enough to find out flaws in the objective design.
If you look at mvm_intercept... the only feedback i had basicly came from tests i organized. Yet i managed to change the gamemode similar to what steed did to A/D CP modes. The map itself became harder to learn, but those that played multiple rounds on it realy liked the map as in the end its still a very simple map, they are just not used to defending 2 paths in mvm.
A small change can result in a major gameplay diffirence. Just pick the right change.
However, the main issue i still see is that once people see something odd they say 'do it like badlands'... and thats the main problem. They pick an example you shouldnt follow when you try something new and people seem to force them to listen to it. Badlands works as a 5cp map, and its an excelent example for that. But for payload maps its plain trash as example. For payload upward and badwater are examples. If its a new mode you simply dont have any examples, so dont purely listen to them.
If i listened to all the feedback and did the suggestions people gave, skullcove wouldnt play well as mvm map and would be a labyrinth instead. The only part i did listen to was the issue they felt and did try to find my own way to solve it (sometimes it was simply changing lights or textures - and the complaint was that it lacks a path to escape from - which was there all the time but the light made it barely visible). And that is also what mappers should do. Use your own solution, not the solution people want. If you feel that an area plays smooth, it often is. People might have to get used to it as they dont know the map yet.
Too often i have seen maps becoming complex to counter unbalanced parts, rather than changing the unbalanced part on its own.
If you innovate on map design, innovate on the solutions to issues aswel. Dont go generic.
If people say its confusing then its more likely a problem with your map flow which still can be things like:
- Your hud is confusing or incorrect (in my plr/tc map i originaly didnt have the plr hud - i removed its tc map and that solved a huge problem)
- Too many paths (on average you shouldnt go over 3 paths, people normaly already have a problem watching 2 paths at once, 3 is ideal to allow counters but more means people get overwhelmed by options). Its often better to mix 2 paths to 1 by simply making 1 of them higher than the other but still allow changing the path between them
- Your gamemode has the flaw of going too fast. People have to be able to follow what happened, even if that happened 1 minute into the game (by a ninja cap of cp5 at steel). They will learn fast to counter.
People in maps are dumb at decisions (W+M1 is basicly the only path they follow), not dumb at understanding (backburning even works with W+M1, and for that you need to know the map)
