Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
thanks for the reply. ofc i dont have too much live testing right now so i was brainstorming for the most part.
this map reminds me of (6) pavlov's house.
Posts: 301
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
4 
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
I guess the 2VP Pudding on Pripyat was alrdy mentioned before right? Just add a 3rd VP.. the rest of the new 2v2 maps are either fine or only have small issues imo
 | Playercard of Bo-Bobby Lion | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
I guess the 2VP Pudding on Pripyat was alrdy mentioned before right? Just add a 3rd VP.. the rest of the new 2v2 maps are either fine or only have small issues imo
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
I've found another problem in Lisorne River:
Infantry can't retreat (from north to south) through the bridge on the left, and instead of using the ford next to the river they run to the ford on the middle of the map to get back to the base.
Got a replay to show
Posts: 498
usf 
okw 
soviets 
ostheerFI
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
If you don't like the map veto it, there are plenty that like it just fine the way it is. And considering I already explained AND tested this map for about 6 months on and off stream... yah its not getting another VP, it was entirely designed around the two VP setup.
For example, if I were to add a 3rd VP directly between the two bases and the two existing VPs the entire map will be north favored, so it will require and entire restructuring of the entire map to improve pathing to account for the same travel times to all points, and on top of that the 3rd VP would be in the middle of an open, negative cover area, so in the end, it would be better off left alone. Especially since the vocal minority would love to bitch about any changes regardless, and there are plenty of people that enjoy the map the way it is.
Posts: 2742
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently Banned
Posts: 2742
And you all just described what the map was intended to do. If the game lasts over an hour.
Veto it if you don't like it, like I said, others enjoy it a ton and I'm not getting anything new out of it.
The map was designed to be "this side" and "that side", and when one is lost you move over and fight up a side together, it has a ying yang effect early on in the game and than splits down the map horizontally once each sides finds the rhythm. The long extended flanks with site blockers make for large decisive movements to get behind the enemy.
Also the VP tick is the same as 2-1 vps with 3 vps when you have both, the only reason it gets extended is when both sides hold one. And at one point or another somebody has to push, make a play. All ins.
If you don't like that play style slap a veto on it.
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
Of course? There's nothing to dispute there.
But I will say the VP tick is 2-0. It's only the same as 2-1 when one of the VPs is neutral. With 3 VPs the VP tick usually only freezes as a result of territory trading hands. With 2 VPs the default state is frozen and trading 2-0 control. It's definitely a different pacing: a drain rate of mainly two and some zero versus mainly one and some three.
The map entails a lategame. Plan accordingly.
Posts: 3032 | Subs: 3
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
Ok fine, I guess I cant argue your veto argument. But pls let me tell you one more thing: since the fuel depot is next to HQ and kinda impossible to cap for the enemy, early agressiveness isnt paying off at all on this map.
The smartest thing to do is just to play campy and static af (for example in front of a VP) until you can spam a ton of tanks and arty to annihilate the enemy with an all in push. And I really feel more and more players on this map realize that
Feels4v4Man
Posts: 37
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
I am still looking for some good ideas to improve Halbe. As I mentioned before, it was never supposed to be a conventional map, exspecially not for ranked games.
So I fully understand why several people don´t like it.
But the highway will remain the main feature of the map. Which doesn´t mean I can´t improve a few things. Here is the current plan. I am planning to create some safe passages, where you can cross the Autobahn without cover penalties, exspecially near the VPs and fuel points. And what do you think about additional cover on the highway?
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently Banned
Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4
Its can be green covers zone, its can be craters, its can be broken part of planes,cars and another.
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently Banned
You want pathing issues due to green cover all being medium crush and up? The increased move speed of the road will fuck up light vehicles, and then introducing anything above medium crush will make pathing horrendous.
The best solution is craters to maintain the "free" pathing the map currently uses along the middle area.
.
 |
|
|
79 | ||
 |
|
|
42 | ||
|
|
|
|
33 | ||
|
|
|
|
23 | ||
|
|
|
|
20 | ||
 |
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
626 | ||
|
|
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
