Cleaning up the 1v1 map pool(again)
5 May 2017, 01:20 AM
#1
Posts: 223
As I looked around at the list of maps to veto as OST, I was thinking that why do some maps are still in the 1v1 pool as they are extremely badly designed, I could accept if that map would be playable to some factions but not to others but some of them are so ridiculous that I just straight up ban them for all factions. For example, Minsk Pocket, this map is so large it takes forever for a retreating squad to come back to fight and this benefits FRPs a lot, plus non-sensical VP placement makes games last more than an hour at best and slog at worst. Road to Kharkov is also another example of a badly designed map, bad spawns and the narrow scope of the map benefits MG camping as flanking is limited. And why the hell is Semiosky Summer still in the map pool? The entire map can be called, "How NOT to DESIGN COH2 MAPS 101". However, some of the community ones are very good like Brysank Forest and others could use a VP placement change like Crossroad(it's a very good map, just the base VPs are too easy to defend and thus very rare to triple cap).
Fail of War 3 
5 May 2017, 01:44 AM
#2
Posts: 2742
I struggle to accept just about every CoH2 map as balanced or interesting from a design standpoint.
Removing or adding maps won't fix my own gripes with CoH2 maps. (See my sig. I should make that mod a wincondition to reintroduce dynamic pop cap...)
But anyway, I think a rotation of maps is beneficial for every game, 1v1 through 4v4. I mean, I may like Steppes and Rails and Metal, but ffs I've played those maps so many times. Vetoes can only go so far, but a trimmer list that rotates through different combinations of possible maps might be nice.
Removing or adding maps won't fix my own gripes with CoH2 maps. (See my sig. I should make that mod a wincondition to reintroduce dynamic pop cap...)
But anyway, I think a rotation of maps is beneficial for every game, 1v1 through 4v4. I mean, I may like Steppes and Rails and Metal, but ffs I've played those maps so many times. Vetoes can only go so far, but a trimmer list that rotates through different combinations of possible maps might be nice.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
5 May 2017, 02:30 AM
#3
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
I agree with semoisky summer, and maybe winter imo. Minsk as well but not with road to kharkov. While the narrow map does limit flanking, and certain garrisons are absolutely overpowered with MGs in them, this map is infinitly worse in 2v2 pool. Personally Halbe is one of my favorite maps. It has major glaring issues like massive red cover roads which make light vehicles super potent and few shot blockers which make wide arc MGs amazing. Snipers are difficult to flank as well, but what I love the most about it is how it is almost symmetrical, which makes for a more balanced game (and highlights faction flaws). I'd love for another map similar to it with more shot/sight blockers and no massive strips of red cover.
Side note: Roads are an issue. Perticularly if your opponet gets snared by AT nade, mine etc and they're on a road, their vehicle moves faster than infantry can move to follow up with another snare even when their vehicle is already crippled! That's annoying as hell.
Side note: Roads are an issue. Perticularly if your opponet gets snared by AT nade, mine etc and they're on a road, their vehicle moves faster than infantry can move to follow up with another snare even when their vehicle is already crippled! That's annoying as hell.
5 May 2017, 11:43 AM
#4
Posts: 611
I agree with semoisky summer, and maybe winter imo. Minsk as well but not with road to kharkov. While the narrow map does limit flanking, and certain garrisons are absolutely overpowered with MGs in them, this map is infinitly worse in 2v2 pool. Personally Halbe is one of my favorite maps. It has major glaring issues like massive red cover roads which make light vehicles super potent and few shot blockers which make wide arc MGs amazing. Snipers are difficult to flank as well, but what I love the most about it is how it is almost symmetrical, which makes for a more balanced game (and highlights faction flaws). I'd love for another map similar to it with more shot/sight blockers and no massive strips of red cover.
Side note: Roads are an issue. Perticularly if your opponet gets snared by AT nade, mine etc and they're on a road, their vehicle moves faster than infantry can move to follow up with another snare even when their vehicle is already crippled! That's annoying as hell.
You must be kidding. Halbe is atrocious.
It is too small to start with, making indirect fire a real pain in the arse. Mgs are easily accounted for with morters and or smoke. It is plain in the extreme with almost no interesting features making it utterly boring. There are multiple trees that obscure the players view in general and there are also blind spots where points are obscured by trees so you have to rotate the camera incase demos are hiding.
It is extremely cramped in certain areas allowing for CQ units to hold a bottle neck. The entry to the bases also feels particularly awkward. Penals in amongst the trees are a freaking nightmare to deal with in general because they can position anywhere, where as grens must stay at max distance and tanks are easy targets for at satchels..
No, Halbe is god awful and i cannot wait for it to be removed...
I don't think the level of symmetry you desire is necessary in coh2, although a few maps that are utterly unsymmetrical are quite bad, eg semosky,.
5 May 2017, 11:58 AM
#5
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
Leave the 1v1 map pool, better have a look at the 2v2 map pool m8
5 May 2017, 13:27 PM
#6
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
You must be kidding. Halbe is atrocious.
It is too small to start with, making indirect fire a real pain in the arse. Mgs are easily accounted for with morters and or smoke. It is plain in the extreme with almost no interesting features making it utterly boring. There are multiple trees that obscure the players view in general and there are also blind spots where points are obscured by trees so you have to rotate the camera incase demos are hiding.
It is extremely cramped in certain areas allowing for CQ units to hold a bottle neck. The entry to the bases also feels particularly awkward. Penals in amongst the trees are a freaking nightmare to deal with in general because they can position anywhere, where as grens must stay at max distance and tanks are easy targets for at satchels..
No, Halbe is god awful and i cannot wait for it to be removed...
I don't think the level of symmetry you desire is necessary in coh2, although a few maps that are utterly unsymmetrical are quite bad, eg semosky,.
This just explains why CQC maps are unbalanced. Take Caen or Bryansk. Both relatively CQC maps containing all what you described giving the allies a formidable advantage. Smoke/mortars also a dream for OKW. ISGs are no where near their cost to their power due to low AoE, and against garrisons are subpar compared to a mortar and 9 pop cap. Symmetry is not required, but it makes design significantly easier and points out gapping holes in faction design. Crossroads is another semi symmetrical map and I'd argue it's one of the more balanced maps. It has it's flaws like any other, but i'd say less than La Gleize.
5 May 2017, 15:24 PM
#7
Posts: 223
This just explains why CQC maps are unbalanced. Take Caen or Bryansk. Both relatively CQC maps containing all what you described giving the allies a formidable advantage. Smoke/mortars also a dream for OKW. ISGs are no where near their cost to their power due to low AoE, and against garrisons are subpar compared to a mortar and 9 pop cap. Symmetry is not required, but it makes design significantly easier and points out gapping holes in faction design. Crossroads is another semi symmetrical map and I'd argue it's one of the more balanced maps. It has it's flaws like any other, but i'd say less than La Gleize.
Caen & Bryansk are pretty good for OKW/USF/Sov and to an extent Brits while being slightly disadvantaged against OST because units can close the MG42 gap very easily. However, I found that OST can get by with G43 doctrines(Lightning War & Elite Troops) and transitioning to their CQC PzGrens later in the game. Halbe however is a death sentence to OKW/USF but OKW can get by with spamming Kubels(which is also a retarded cheese build).
Fail of War 3
5 May 2017, 15:40 PM
#8
Posts: 1554 | Subs: 7
La Gleize, both Semois, Bryansk Forest, Minsk Pocket, Road to Kharkov, Angoville and Westwall should be removed without hesitation. Their inherent map design is not beneficial for exciting CoH2 play.
You could argue about the remaining to create a super good map pool like in CoH1 but I think those maps are to start with.
You could argue about the remaining to create a super good map pool like in CoH1 but I think those maps are to start with.
"Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca
5 May 2017, 15:44 PM
#9
Posts: 1225
Kholodny needs a serious rework, the map is an autoloss for WM when starting east, and quite unbalanced for every other faction as well with an East start.
5 May 2017, 16:03 PM
#10
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
La Gleize, both Semois, Bryansk Forest, Minsk Pocket, Road to Kharkov, Angoville and Westwall should be removed without hesitation. Their inherent map design is not beneficial for exciting CoH2 play.
You could argue about the remaining to create a super good map pool like in CoH1 but I think those maps are to start with.
+1
I wonder why we still have La Gleize, semosky winder and minsk
5 May 2017, 17:01 PM
#11
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
La Gleize, both Semois, Bryansk Forest, Minsk Pocket, Road to Kharkov, Angoville and Westwall should be removed without hesitation. Their inherent map design is not beneficial for exciting CoH2 play.
You could argue about the remaining to create a super good map pool like in CoH1 but I think those maps are to start with.
+1
5 May 2017, 18:05 PM
#12
Posts: 73
Not everyone is going to like that certain maps are removed. A better solution is to add more veto options for all game modes.
5 May 2017, 18:09 PM
#13
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently BannedLa Gleize is bad map.
I like both semoskie, but think winter are better for 2v2 (but need fix north side).
Maps where need fix north side, semoskie, kharkov.
I dont play new maps like Bryansk Forest, Westwall so cannot give feedback about them.
Caen cannot say that this map are bad, just different. Halbe need cover rewok. Also like write, Kholody ferma east side need rework, its hard to get VP. Need to fix north side of Arnhem also, its too hard to get VP, coz distance from north are to big compared to south side.
Why the problem give more veto for all game mods if we cannot make balance maps or if players dont like some maps ?
I like both semoskie, but think winter are better for 2v2 (but need fix north side).
Maps where need fix north side, semoskie, kharkov.
I dont play new maps like Bryansk Forest, Westwall so cannot give feedback about them.
Caen cannot say that this map are bad, just different. Halbe need cover rewok. Also like write, Kholody ferma east side need rework, its hard to get VP. Need to fix north side of Arnhem also, its too hard to get VP, coz distance from north are to big compared to south side.
Why the problem give more veto for all game mods if we cannot make balance maps or if players dont like some maps ?
Relic killing our game, lets save COH2 from Relic 
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
5 May 2017, 18:11 PM
#14
Posts: 223
Not everyone is going to like that certain maps are removed. A better solution is to add more veto options for all game modes.
More vetoes are a bandaid to bad map design, bad maps should be removed entirely from the pool because it makes playing absolutely stale(Road to Kharkov,Halbe), artificially prolongs matches(Minsk, Langres) and fucks over factions with no core flamers(Semiosky) or just garrisons that allow control of the entire map(La Gleize)
Fail of War 3
5 May 2017, 18:16 PM
#15
Posts: 952 | Subs: 3
More vetoes are a bandaid to bad map design...
Also if I'm not mistaken, adding more vetoes will, in the long-run cause more issues than it solves.
Every time you add a veto, you shrink the number of available players on automatch. Sure, a lot of players will choose to veto the same maps (because they're generally disliked), but if you don't choose the same maps, you limit your chances of matching and increase the wait time.
For a game in its twilight years, longer waiting times on Automatch queues are definitely not what we need!
I'm definitely open to the concept of "fixing" some maps, rather than removing them altogether. If this were possible!
5 May 2017, 18:21 PM
#16
Posts: 223
Also if I'm not mistaken, adding more vetoes will, in the long-run cause more issues than it solves.
Every time you add a veto, you shrink the number of available players on automatch. Sure, a lot of players will choose to veto the same maps (because they're generally disliked), but if you don't choose the same maps, you limit your chances of matching and increase the wait time.
For a game in its twilight years, longer waiting times on Automatch queues are definitely not what we need!
I'm definitely open to the concept of "fixing" some maps, rather than removing them altogether. If this were possible!
Sure some maps can be fixed to allow better matches(VP placement primarily for Crossroads/Langres and Lost Glider could use a hefty HP garrison decrease) and absolutely agree since it's a good map otherwise but some maps are purely garbage just from a design standpoint(Semiosky and Road to Kharkov). If you guys are allowed to change maps I will provide lots of feedback no problem.
Fail of War 3
5 May 2017, 18:29 PM
#17
Posts: 1820 | Subs: 2
There are a lot of maps to be removed and some good ones to add instead.
5 May 2017, 18:42 PM
#18
Posts: 278 | Subs: 1
La Gleize, both Semois, Bryansk Forest, Minsk Pocket, Road to Kharkov, Angoville and Westwall should be removed without hesitation. Their inherent map design is not beneficial for exciting CoH2 play.
You could argue about the remaining to create a super good map pool like in CoH1 but I think those maps are to start with.
Well. It would be nice to have a gameplay based analyse by a strategist.
Because everyone is always complaining about the map quality but there is still no useful feedback a mapper could work with to balance and adjust maps for the game.
5 May 2017, 18:52 PM
#19
Posts: 1138 | Subs: 2
Also if I'm not mistaken, adding more vetoes will, in the long-run cause more issues than it solves.
Every time you add a veto, you shrink the number of available players on automatch.
As far as we know that's not the case. See here.
TL;DR version is: You are matched regardless of your vetoes, and then the map is randomly selected between the maps that got the least vetoes.
5 May 2017, 20:06 PM
#20
1 Posts: 1276
If any map pools need looking at its 2v2-4v4 lol.
On a side note, I feel like some of the 1v1 maps simply need touch ups.
On a side note, I feel like some of the 1v1 maps simply need touch ups.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
12 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.271108.715+22
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
947 users are online:
947 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49074
Welcome our newest member, Kintz652
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Kintz652
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM