It's a beautiful map with good detail.
![:D :D](/images/Smileys/biggrin.gif)
There were issues with crashing and lag, but I fixed them! I've also increased the population cap to 250.
Enjoy!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=276998893
![](http://i61.tinypic.com/2usj47d.jpg)
![](http://i57.tinypic.com/kdsy95.jpg)
![](http://i58.tinypic.com/2ebeu0g.jpg)
Posts: 92
Posts: 70
Posts: 92
I haven't played on it but I've looked at it with the worldbuilder. You put a lot of detail into it, which is awesome. But your territory points look a heavily lopsided in terms of how fair it is. The 2 main roads each have a territory point on them that runs the length of the map as cutoff points for each side of the map. But one side has 6 territory points on the entire side of the map while the other has 13. Basically the team that starts closest to the windmills is at a HUGE disadvantage. Also they don't really have a quick route to their cutoff point with vehicles while the other team has a road leading them straight to their cutoff point. The map in terms of objects, themes, details, textures, and how it looks is great! But the gameplay and resource layout is gamebreaking.
Here's a screenshot what I mean: http://i.imgur.com/jqy8Kkl.jpg
The red lines show the path that vehicles can take to get to the cutoff points. The team that starts in the top right corner can only send their tanks and vehicles out of their base going south in one direction. North is basically infantry only. While the team in the bottom left can send tanks all across the southern points (blue lines) and move them up into the middle. Basically the bottom left team has way more options for pathing of infantry and tanks. They also have the resource advantage since they can defend their cutoff points (white lines) with vehicles easier and even if their cutoff point is taken, they still have 2x the resources as the other team.
Not trying to be harsh or anything, but map balance is a problem.
Posts: 70
Posts: 70
Posts: 318
Posts: 92
is this the map you had performance issues whit? if so i can see why from orbit, i see you have 23(
roughly counted) water sources and the recommended is 2-3 water sources.
To quote MonolithicBacon "And again, the number of water sources is the "ideal" amount. Each water tap lowers the optimisation of the map considerably. Some Relic maps have more (particularly the mud maps), but they are well optimised in other ways to compensate for this."
Posts: 92
Posts: 92
Posts: 92
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
35 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
32 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
23 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
1 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
268 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
23 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
12 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
5 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
4 | ||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
2 |