Pripyat Sector is poorly made, here's why

I appreciate the creative idea behind this map and the effort, but this map doesn't belong to automatch IMO.

• Only 2 Victory Points: This encourages campy turtling gameplay and is against the dynamic and action oriented nature of this game.
  
• No space for movement: A simple retreat takes around a minute, thanks to ineffective pathing and the amount of rubble and trash which block proper movements.
  
• Too many sight blockers: This map is too claustrophobic and favors blobs.
  
• Players Trapped in their spawn zone: Players are trapped in their base due to the vast amount of walls around their spawn location locking them down inside their base.
  
  

Edited title.

I agree.

I remember when the map.was first being developed I said the 2 vps was going to be a problem forever...

What irked me the most was that all through the contest mapmakers were instructed that maps had to follow a formula of resource and vp points or the map wouldnt even be considered by relic, let alone the contest judges.

Then pop a 2vp map makes it to automatch.

I don't disagree with you that 2 vps just doesn't fit gameplay very well, or at least current gameplay. I dunno what could be done with the map to change it though.

I appreciate the creative idea behind this map and the effort, but this map doesn't belong to automatch IMO.

• Only 2 Victory Points: This encourages campy turtling gameplay and is against the dynamic and action oriented nature of this game.
  
• No space for movement: A simple retreat takes around a minute, thanks to ineffective pathing and the amount of rubble and trash which block proper movements.
  
• Too many sight blockers: This map is too claustrophobic and favors blobs.
  
• Players Trapped in their spawn zone: Players are trapped in their base due to the vast amount of walls around their spawn location locking them down inside their base.
  
  

+1

still don't know why eindhoven and ecliptic fields get kicked and something like düsseldorf, gelsenkirchen or the trillard 1v1 city maps block your vetos since the build of the pyramids

In my experience, this is a very non-campy map, even with 2 VPs. The games end up being longer, however, but I don't think that is a bad thing. There are hugely rewarding cutoffs that can punish turtles.

Could you post an example of pathing issues or base exiting issues?

I appreciate the creative idea behind this map and the effort, but this map doesn't belong to automatch IMO.

• Only 2 Victory Points: This encourages campy turtling gameplay and is against the dynamic and action oriented nature of this game.
  
• No space for movement: A simple retreat takes around a minute, thanks to ineffective pathing and the amount of rubble and trash which block proper movements.
  
• Too many sight blockers: This map is too claustrophobic and favors blobs.
  
• Players Trapped in their spawn zone: Players are trapped in their base due to the vast amount of walls around their spawn location locking them down inside their base.
  
  

I apologize in advance if I come across as hostile or defensive, it is early and I'm not feeling well.

First and for most you can thank relic for this ever being submitted, when they reached out for the 2v2's in the first place, this was the only one ready at the time and they thought it was good to go (as did I). You can see their desperation in the introduction of the Lisores by Stahlhagel when myself and mono (mainly mono) updated it, up until that point it wasn't touched for almost 2 years, this is another story however. With every map you must remember, we don't have the resources of 2 years ago, when the devs actively tested with us for MONTHS before the map was released, so the only true testing (outside of me myself getting people to play and post replays on it) is when it hits rotation, it sucks and I apologize, but I am only human and can only catch so many issues, same with the people that helped test.

You're post is also almost completely invalidating itself, here is why:

Turtling gameplay... yet you are stuck in your base? How does that happen? You either get one, or the other. Not both. Especially considering the extreme overall length of the map... if you are getting locked inside you're base I think it has to do a little more with an error in play that led to that ultimately. If not post some replays and show me what you mean, cause as of right now I can't see this being an issue if the game is going well or even for each team.

To many sight blockers? Where the building hedgerows? Other than that there are only the medium crush brick walls down the middle road (so 15 minutes in they are gone), and this map is far from claustrophobic. You can go to just about any place (in the middle of the map) and it is immensely open, outside of the shot blocking building rows, which, are in every other map... only difference is they are usually garrison-able. Once again provide some replays showing me where you had trouble moving that wasn't intended in the ultra wide flanks.

The only things that make sense to talk about are the 2VP nature of the map (which the entire map was designed around, so not changing), and the long retreat paths. However the long retreat paths are from this being a longer map, but than again you shouldn't be retreating that much (or that far rather) if it encourages camping and than you get trapped in your base as you claim. Once again, need some replays to see how this is an issue from the map, and not an over extension.

The 2VP's was always an issue, and its pretty 50/50 on how it goes, there is very little grey area. It is either people enjoy the map or hate it. There really is no inbetween. As with all maps, this was something that was risked by myself and by Relic when we went forward with putting it into automatch.

90% of all the maps in CoH2 are bad, but this one tips the scales. To be honest, almost all new maps added a few months ago are so bad, it is just unbearable. But Tric especially doesn't like constructive criticism, he simply tells you that the changes can't be done or something of that nature, then calls you out on never having build a map or done anything map related, and eventually ignores you. He will of course deny all of this.

The things that are being considered to move however is the fuel. Mainly due to the fact that is to hard to contest in most cases outside the cutoff play. This was talked about what seems like months ago, but I have heard absolutely nothing about updating ANY of the maps for almost a month and a half. In fact the last thing that I talked to Relic about was getting a team of mappers together to fix the maps in rotation (Relic maps included), but there is nobody "active" anymore outside myself and monolithic. The people that I did reach out to that would have been a good fit, simply put, want to be paid or have no interest in fixing anything due to multiple factors.

No matter what the man says, this map is utter garbage.

Yet, you specifically, just the other day in the shoutbox, complained about schillberg and how you veto it more than this map..? So what does that make that than?

And what exactly do I have to deny? I ignore people that can't post a proper objective response, which you cannot. I take constructive criticism just fine, yours however, never was. The feedback thread was where the majority of the changes to the 1v1 maps came from, that weren't already being implemented, but continue your campaign of defmation and hate.

If you don't like the map veto it.

If the main concept of this map is to have both players to coordinate to get the 2 VPs, would it be possible to have 4 VPs instead, or make VPs cause a quicker amount of victory point trickle when all of them are in one team's control?

Otherwise, most of the time VPs don't trickle, which can lead to excruciatingly long matches (unless you already crushed your opponent, in which point VPs don't matter anymore).

If the main concept of this map is to have both players to coordinate to get the 2 VPs, would it be possible to have 4 VPs instead, or make VPs cause a quicker amount of victory point trickle when all of them are in one team's control?

Otherwise, most of the time VPs don't trickle, which can lead to excruciatingly long matches (unless you already crushed your opponent, in which point VPs don't matter anymore).

Yes this is also something that was considered with the fuel move. This would lead to possibly needing more garrisons (which were also planned long, long ago). The reason for this would be for more opportunity for harassment to ambient building call in play.

However until I actually get some sort of info that map changes will actually be implemented in a patch, I have no control over what happens in regards to an update. The other issue is that is a lot of changes at once, so it would open up more problems that it would potentially solve without proper testing, which we don't have the ability to do.

This map always struck me as the equivalent of an annihilation map, since the 2 VPs were very likely to lead to long stalemate matches.

Since annihilation maps were never in automatch, this would be the argument foe either removing it from automatch, or as Mr Smith suggests, increasing the VPs.

This map always struck me as the equivalent of an annihilation map, since the 2 VPs were very likely to lead to long stalemate matches.

Since annihilation maps were never in automatch, this would be the argument foe either removing it from automatch, or as Mr Smith suggests, increasing the VPs.

Or base dives for that matter, but yah.

We were given basically 2 weeks to come up with 5 maps between the 2 of us, and as you can see we only got 4 and 1 of them wasn't even ours.

I am more than happy to update and change things that we were all on the board during the development, but until I here some sort of communication, I can't really do anything.

I have never played annihilation matches on COH1, but memory suggests there were several who did. Accordingly, this map is not without merit, since it provides annihilation mode (more or less), if it is removed from automatch.

Another alternative is to maybe go the whole hog, and remove the VPs altogether when placing it in Custom matches?

EDIT

I just remembered that Blowlands started with 4 VPs, but they were subsequently reduced down to 3 VPs.

I have never played annihilation matches on COH1, but memory suggests there were several who did. Accordingly, this map is not without merit, since it provides annihilation mode (more or less), if it is removed from automatch.

Another alternative is to maybe go the whole hog, and remove the VPs altogether when placing it in Custom matches?

EDIT

I just remembered that Blowlands started with 4 VPs, but they were subsequently reduced down to 3 VPs.

Well the reason for the 2 vps was to force "horizontal" engagements vs always fighting into one another from each others base. That and a 3rd VP would be in negative cover, so the best bet would be to do 4, which we talked about at length in the development phase, but as I have said we have no proper testing support from Relic. So the only way it really gets tested is in automatch now, if we had support like the balance patches did, things would be better, but we don't.

The 4 VPS would also increase the tick to for a 3-1 cap to be the speed of a full cap of a 3 VP game, and 4 VP full cap would be faster obviously. It also break up the play styles/patterns a bit with good placement which should be fairly easy to replicate due to the quadrant style layout of the map.

The garrisons would also be increased (potentially) by 4. Allowing some variance in play and more contention of the critical points from ambient spawns. However this could be to much change at once, so I'm unsure.

Add this ontop of the fuel move away from the bases, this was all discussed in the development, but we were never able to test it, due to the fact that they wanted 5 2v2's in the period of about 2 weeks... this halted all further testing of other options and forced my hand to maintain this design.

Invis a post for defamation and the following discussion for offtopic.

If you guys have issues, solve it through PM.