Kick out 4vs4 maps

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2017, 04:49 AMbuttcheeksontoast

I agree on Lienne Forest. The middle is an interesting dynamic where one side gets an awesome garrison, but later on have a disadvantage due to being blocked off by the railway. And the left is an urban fight, wrestling for control of the garrison next to the VP and surrounding garrisons. The right is just.... ugh. Especially once a Bofors or such goes down.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2017, 21:02 PMTickTack

People like Liene forest but the initial rush to garrison the western city is a game decider too often.
I have never seen forces rape northern base. The south base always gets raped. That can't be correct balance.

Jump back to quoted post7 Aug 2017, 21:08 PMSturmpanther

Intresting:

Fact is: south side gets faster in the big middle building then north side

Jump back to quoted post8 Aug 2017, 02:25 AMRoswellBonewell

The south gets there quicker but the main building on the road has fewer windows and gets rekt from the several buildings across the street. That only leaves the building just south of the VP. Which is quickly destroyed by mortar. Then you have NO garrisons vs the 3 or 4 across the street. Maybe this was meant to be, in some form of asymmetric balance, just like the middle VP building? Left gets the better buildings on the south. Middle gets the northern building. Both are somewhat flankable.

Sometimes when you make a map, you just try to make it look cool and somewhat realistic. There are no symmetric towns in the world right?

Jump back to quoted post8 Aug 2017, 08:43 AMSturmpanther

Not all maps should be mirrowed.

For example the middle house. Yes you can have a MG there etc. But in latgame you will hate the house when you drive with your tanks

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 14:45 PMlel69fgt

We're seeing same maps 24/7 anyway, I would love to see some new stuff instead.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 15:02 PMSturmpanther

I guess there are no Mapmakers out who created new good 4vs4 maps.

Also missing good 3vs3 maps. Thats the reason why many 3 premade searching for 4vs4.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 16:05 PMLordRommel

Problem is: Why should we work on 4on4 maps?
The amount of feedback for maps is very limited and most of the feedback is toxic.
I cant see any way to make new high-quality 4on4 maps in the near future.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 16:19 PMMonolithicBacon

I completely agree. Even after all these years, a 1vs1 map design alone will take me 20-30 hours before testing.

4vs4 maps are a massive time commitment, and certainly not worth the response we usually get for making them.

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 21:14 PMTobis

Lorch is absolute garbage. It's a contest of who can out cheese the other side harder, and soviet field HQs make me wanna die

Terrible vp placement and wasted space, and practically impossible to take the fuel away from the enemy without baseraping them. The middle turns into a meat grinder of emplacement spam, indirect, and arty strikes. The shotblockers everywhere and roads force people to blob the fuck out of everything, including tanks. It has literally every single possible bad design element all on one map.

Jump back to quoted post9 Nov 2017, 05:08 AMMistah_S

Why so much hate for MortangisRegion?
Is it because the fuel actually requires some tactics to capture or is it because map is too large?

Jump back to quoted post10 Aug 2017, 16:05 PMLordRommel

Problem is: Why should we work on 4on4 maps?
The amount of feedback for maps is very limited and most of the feedback is toxic.
I cant see any way to make new high-quality 4on4 maps in the near future.

Jump back to quoted post9 Nov 2017, 09:34 AMKothre

Ummm because it's the most played mode and the 4v4 maps are getting really fucking stale...? There are maps already on the workshop that are (in my opinion) good enough to put into the ladder, with or without some minor adjustments.