Flawed Map System

i'm going to piggy-back off @kevshadowslayer here

i completely agree that the maps are too "balanced" now, thus causing boring gameplay... @November has talked about this before w/ his kingdom islands + lighthouse that they tried to make it so balanced that it isnt quite as fun...and i agree with that. sometimes the imperfections make "perfection", or at least what some people may view as "perfection" (see: blackout, i guess)

now i do want to mention something regarding this being more of an aesthetic wave in my eye, let's take the example kev used which is blackout not being accepted into wave 11 if it was submitted in a current time. if someone made blackout without it ever being made, you are correct, it would never be accepted...possibly purely due to aesthetics and seeing that it's just a bunch of sandstone boxes, really. but, those imperfections make people think it's perfection, as it's simple & has gameplay people like. i get that not everyone likes blackout, but it is a favored map so the example works.

however, there is a line that is to be crossed w/ how unbalanced something can be (at least in my opinion)...i would never want to see something like waterfall back in rotation again, or like the original castle...that's just too unbalanced for it to be enjoyable. but, the fact that people are trying to make the maps as balanced as possible is slightly frustrating and seeing that the only maps that are even getting a decently fair look are the ones that seem completely balanced, or as close to "balanced" as it can be (remember folks, this is minecraft capture the flag, we are far from a "balance") while also having some damn nice aesthetics. if, the system of testing the maps makes a return (waves, vaults, whatever), then maps that might be risky to test can be tested, and might turn out great. so maybe a map like blackout that doesnt look good and doesnt look very promising is tested, and people actually like it...then it gets added rather than something that is trying too hard to be balanced in every area and looks really good.

tl;dr - i agree w/ the points made that the maps are trying to hard to find this perfect balance, which in reality, causes boring gameplay (as if ctf isnt boring enough already). imperfections can make perfection to people. do more vault/wave events where people can test the maps, and add maps to the event that may not look very promising in the aesthetic/balance light of things, b/c they might actually be good.

sorry if i didnt make much sense here, i kind of just like...put things together and stuff...minecraft!

 

Judging from the screenshots and a few gameplays, I thought that the maps focused a lot more on size and the terrain which makes it difficult to navigate through (not all of them). Of course I'm still super inexperienced with the maps so what I say is good as trash.

Blackout is simple, it's just a box with routes along it to the flagroom which is in the middle, which I think is the reason players like it. Keep the layout simple but the details nice.

 

sorry for taking up a bunch of room on your screen

The thing is, one-day things can be missed by lots of players. Even weekends are often unavailable for usual weekend regulars such as myself (yay, weekend homework).

inb4 "stream" or "map stream" becomes the official term for it

Anyone else notice a great rarity in Serpent's Lair?? (I'm pretty sure it never got removed... )

Eh, I'll get to this in response to Shadow.

your mind = blown

(@Aceblue2) Well technically, on the balance part n such, a CTF map is a CTF map, things are balanced no matter what. That was the first impression from the word "balance" that I got, but I suppose everyone of course means class balance. In that case, I pretty much agree with all of Shadoe's (and Kev's) concepts. Perhaps CTF map builders could get back to basics, focusing first on well-playable, relatively simple map design, then on aesthetics, since it seems aesthetics make maps more complicated than they should be. (Of course, it can't hurt to make simple maps look bootiful, either. c: )

 

Not for me, I will only be satisfied when i get voxel.

 

Im not sure who is managing build tbh.

 

i have to agree here. The map aesthetics are alright (which is debatable since beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder) but gameplay wise these aren't great. It really needs releasing for testing purposes of some sort to stop this happening

 

I believe it's been made clear by brawl that they will choose aesthetics over gameplay :I

 

anyone can build a map- but who's going to accept the map? how is this going to change the flawed system? adding more maps from new builders with terrible concepts of what is balanced and what is broken isn't going to fix the problem. Sure, it may become part of the new waves soon when we run out of maps?? lol hahaha its just for fun(seriously i think it will go down from here)
this is criticism to the system, not the builders.
make your own!!!! is not an answer.

 

No offense or anything, but I hope you know that when we chose maps we don't say, "okay this map is ugly, let's not pick it even though it probably has stellar gameplay. This maps looks beautiful though, let's pick it." Aessthics plays a non-existent part when it comes to voting. As for how we do pick them, people are right - we try really hard to pick maps that are balanced as possible. Maybe this isn't the best possible way, but as you've heard, we want to change it.

I just felt the need to clarify that it's not so black and white with gameplay vs. asthetics. Just becaue blackout is the top rated map and isn't the prettiest, doesn't mean all good maps "don't have good aesthetics." Most maps are discarded for numerous reasons - aesthetics is honestly never one of them. If you haven't seen another blackout in the waves, it's because like people said - we wouldn't have picked it in this current time. Blackout is an unbalanced map, and our current mentality says to go the opposite direction - since so many people are set straight on "balancing the game."

Again, we do want to change the system overall - I just wanted to point this out.

 

Was talking bout banners over wool tbh xD I'm okay with the maps, the flag rooms are a bit too open imo, but idrc lol

 

Ah well, when quoting a thread about maps, may want to make that clear next time cx

 

Despite it being random as Baehox (repchatjokesyay) said, i always get Standoff II, Blackout & Slate. Hardly ever anything else. xdlolhah

 

Bring back waterfall !!

 

I barely every play on Slate, but I do play on Dragon Valley and Pavo's Academy a few times a day.

First of all: HOLY CRAP IT"S PAVO! Second: I think that the way you mentioned would be a really nice way of doing it. As it stands now, a very disliked map would be in rotation for months on end, yet people in-game and on the forums would talk about (often complain about) how they don't like it and want it removed.

 

its been suggested before, not just for this map wave, but for others too, but why not just test the maps before they are released??? there used to be somewhat of a system like this where there was the map wave event. I'm not totally sure why it was removed but it was quite helpful in identifying immediate problems with maps. its often hard to find problems with maps just from looking on build. I had a look at orchid cascades on build a while ago and couldn't see too many issues, no incredibly major ones, at least. but now that I've actually played it there are obvious issues that stand out, for example the fact that you can flag shoot both teams flag from mid.

if maps were actually tested before release then it would be a lot easier to see if they suck or not

 

I have to agree with you. The aspect of trying to make a map balanced makes just causes the map to not be as much fun as some others (like Blackout). Blackout is seen as such a great map due to its intense gameplay. What makes the gameplay intense? The fact that Blackout is flat, that Archers can easily dominate the defense, and Soldiers are great for capping. The "flaws" of the map is what makes the map so great (like you said).

 

Perhaps there should be some statistics on which maps teams use in official matches? Teams pick their favorite maps for a reason--whatever those reasons are, they can be more narrowed down by determining which traits teams like about many maps.

Maps like Blackout and uh... other popular maps xD... would of course be high on the charts, but the followups should also be considered. But then maps which are just plain bad should be discriminated against with common sense.

 

I don't see how Blackout is unbalanced. There's about an equal amount of cover and flat free-space in regards to archers, and there's an easily accessible center (battle ground) with also longer side routes which makes it plainly balanced for both teams, and the flagroom is very compact making it easier to runaway with the flag if stolen, and the map is small so it's more fair for the harder roles in the game – offense and recov. (An underground would probably make it worse and create a slower game because the map is already small and has fair enough pathways/cover against archers for the offense to try to maneuver safely/easily.) The only downfall is that there's no sponge to quickly get up on top of the high, box-like structure in the center of the map if you're not soldier, but opposing ninjas, archers, and soldiers can camp that area without much of a problem.

But I do agree, Blackout is noice.

#MapGoals #Template
#ButImGladOriginalityIsAThing xP

 

Was supposed to be inferred from all de recent arguments about le banners cx but k!