Login

russian armor

Tric_TV can fix stalingrad map for free, if you guys want it

28 Jan 2019, 07:15 AM
#21
avatar of blancat

Posts: 810

i dont like tric's map

The maps he made were not good all
28 Jan 2019, 08:13 AM
#22
avatar of Bizrock

Posts: 206

Who's Tric? Can we trust him to make a balanced map or is he gonna shove the changes down our throats without a chance for feedback.


He is pretty open to feedback, and if you want to help you can come to his stream, make suggestions and test the map yourself to see the results.
28 Jan 2019, 09:57 AM
#23
avatar of skemshead

Posts: 611

You may be able to improve this map, but never enough that any Ost wouldn't automatically veto it.
Just consider how op soviets would be with current shocks, or penals or penals with satchels, or ppsh conspam, or Is2 or ISU.

Ost depends too much on mgs, sniper, packs and stugs to ever consider playing on this map.
28 Jan 2019, 12:33 PM
#24
avatar of Bizrock

Posts: 206

You may be able to improve this map, but never enough that any Ost wouldn't automatically veto it.
Just consider how op soviets would be with current shocks, or penals or penals with satchels, or ppsh conspam, or Is2 or ISU.

Ost depends too much on mgs, sniper, packs and stugs to ever consider playing on this map.


Did you even see the tric's video? Reducing the sight blocks and adding red cover would be good to Ost in certain areas of the map. And MGs could almost lock down some entire areas, but offensive you will need to access panzergrens that are great assault units, not to mentions the ass grens and the new Sturmtrooper.
Check his video again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb_PJD5ENsg
28 Jan 2019, 15:35 PM
#25
avatar of Lugie
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 327

I never thought Stalingrad was a bad map. Creates the feeling of "Urban Hell" pretty decently with all the narrow roads, low line-of-sight and short-range engagements, but I dont have much of an eye for balance so take that with a grain of salt.

I think not having a map called Stalingrad, in a game that was about the eastern front, in the public map pool, is a bit stupid. So however you plan to "fix" it, as long as it gets it back into automatch, im down. Just try not to make it too symmetrical and/or remove all the strong-points, too much balance can get a bit boring. If you want to get rid of all the LOS stuff like every other automatch map, try to only do it on half the map. Leave the other half a rubble-strewn destroyed wasteland that only smgs have a hope of winning in.
30 Jan 2019, 19:42 PM
#26
avatar of Bizrock

Posts: 206

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Jan 2019, 15:35 PMLugie
I never thought Stalingrad was a bad map. Creates the feeling of "Urban Hell" pretty decently with all the narrow roads, low line-of-sight and short-range engagements, but I dont have much of an eye for balance so take that with a grain of salt.

I think not having a map called Stalingrad, in a game that was about the eastern front, in the public map pool, is a bit stupid. So however you plan to "fix" it, as long as it gets it back into automatch, im down. Just try not to make it too symmetrical and/or remove all the strong-points, too much balance can get a bit boring. If you want to get rid of all the LOS stuff like every other automatch map, try to only do it on half the map. Leave the other half a rubble-strewn destroyed wasteland that only smgs have a hope of winning in.


Nice that you agree with me the Stalingrad point, is nice to have suggestions, the problem is that some players want the same map designs to apply his own strategy in every map. For example, people want to use JLI in every map, if there is a map that JLI is not good, that map is "bad designed" or bad balanced, allied/axis favored and etc. Maps like Stalingrad would amplify the strategies and some commanders might be useful in a niche scenario.
30 Jan 2019, 20:41 PM
#27
avatar of Lugie
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 327

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 19:42 PMBizrock


Nice that you agree with me the Stalingrad point, is nice to have suggestions, the problem is that some players want the same map designs to apply his own strategy in every map. For example, people want to use JLI in every map, if there is a map that JLI is not good, that map is "bad designed" or bad balanced, allied/axis favored and etc. Maps like Stalingrad would amplify the strategies and some commanders might be useful in a niche scenario.


This.
30 Jan 2019, 23:48 PM
#28
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 19:42 PMBizrock


Nice that you agree with me the Stalingrad point, is nice to have suggestions, the problem is that some players want the same map designs to apply his own strategy in every map. For example, people want to use JLI in every map, if there is a map that JLI is not good, that map is "bad designed" or bad balanced, allied/axis favored and etc. Maps like Stalingrad would amplify the strategies and some commanders might be useful in a niche scenario.


I don't think this is necessarily a player issue though, I think this is more a short coming of the commander system, and the lack of variety of maps. If the game would have launched with 5 urban, 5 industrial, and 5 rural maps. This would have groomed the players to have a more open approach to how maps played. So I feel like this is partly on Relic as well, without even taking into account balance, faction design, or game mechanics.

If the commander system was different or had more varied options for each faction, then you could run commanders for specific map sets or something like that, but it is probably far to late now. Even if I did the best rework of this I could, it will most likely just be at the bottom of the veto list because players will remember the bad experience of the map and just avoid it, no matter how many changes/how much better it may or may not play.
31 Jan 2019, 01:21 AM
#29
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

Urban maps are just a lot more horrible for certain factions than for example open maps favoring the Axis. Too much basic anti-garrisson is behind commanders and then there's Ostheer who are practically defenseless in urban maps versus CQC infantry.

Having a 4th commander choice would've really helped in enabling bringing a specialized commander for the few times you get an urban map. Because it's really not worth it to waste 1/3 of your commander options on the odd chance you get something urban.
31 Jan 2019, 01:32 AM
#30
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 19:42 PMBizrock
Maps like Stalingrad would amplify the strategies and some commanders might be useful in a niche scenario.


That would only apply, if we had a "draft" mode before entering a game. You would kneed to know which map you are playing so you can choose your 3 commanders for your loadout. The system works for tournaments but doesn't work for automatch where you locked down commanders from the getgo.

That's without taking into account the limitations of each faction.
jump backJump back to quoted post30 Jan 2019, 23:48 PMTric


I don't think this is necessarily a player issue though, I think this is more a short coming of the commander system, and the lack of variety of maps. If the game would have launched with 5 urban, 5 industrial, and 5 rural maps. This would have groomed the players to have a more open approach to how maps played. So I feel like this is partly on Relic as well, without even taking into account balance, faction design, or game mechanics.

If the commander system was different or had more varied options for each faction, then you could run commanders for specific map sets or something like that, but it is probably far to late now. Even if I did the best rework of this I could, it will most likely just be at the bottom of the veto list because players will remember the bad experience of the map and just avoid it, no matter how many changes/how much better it may or may not play.


That's the key problem. Besides all the issues with pathing and buildings, if a map is an "autowin/autolose" with certain factions or commanders, it's gonna be hated and vetoed.

Even if Relic released plenty of variety of maps, BALANCE would dictate what most people would like or not. Just remember the balance state of the game on early times. Open maps = Ostheer paradise. Urban maps = Soviet map.
Not saying we are in the same spot, but it's generally agreed that factions keep having key roles locked down or ineffective.

At the end of the day is as you say. No matter how good the rework is, no one is gonna care about it. It's like if someone suddenly said, guys we can fix "Shittard/Prypiat" or heck Don River.
31 Jan 2019, 03:02 AM
#31
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2

oh dear god no, second worst map in coh2 history. Might as well start at the bottom and rework prypiat winter lmao. I would prefer to see new quality maps. Vilshanka for example is very solid imo.
31 Jan 2019, 03:38 AM
#32
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
31 Jan 2019, 03:41 AM
#33
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 03:02 AMGiaA
oh dear god no, second worst map in coh2 history. Might as well start at the bottom and rework prypiat winter lmao. I would prefer to see new quality maps. Vilshanka for example is very solid imo.

But Vilshanka is already a
>Tric map
31 Jan 2019, 15:02 PM
#34
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 03:41 AMTobis

But Vilshanka is already a
>Tric map


That's why I'm mentioning it. In order to avoid triggering people and getting an incoherent rant response you have to combine your opinion with a bit of flattery.
31 Jan 2019, 15:13 PM
#35
avatar of Bizrock

Posts: 206

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 03:02 AMGiaA
oh dear god no, second worst map in coh2 history. Might as well start at the bottom and rework prypiat winter lmao. I would prefer to see new quality maps. Vilshanka for example is very solid imo.

The aim is not to rework shit maps, the objective here is to fix a map that is historically significant and should be present in this game, and someone very kind that have experience (tric) set out to help. Everybody thinks that Stalingrad have problems, that's why this thread exists. If you want to know how to fix it, you can see tric's video in this topic somewhere. If you have suggestions, we would be happy to know.
Phy
31 Jan 2019, 16:11 PM
#36
avatar of Phy

Posts: 509 | Subs: 1

You mean make Stalingrad 2VP or add some bugs? No thanks. We all were really happy when Stalingrad was removed from automatch dont make it comeback.
31 Jan 2019, 16:51 PM
#37
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 16:11 PMPhy
You mean make Stalingrad 2VP or add some bugs?


People like you are why we've only got about three mapmakers left.
31 Jan 2019, 16:52 PM
#38
avatar of Tric
Master Mapmaker Badge

Posts: 1467 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 16:11 PMPhy
You mean make Stalingrad 2VP or add some bugs? No thanks. We all were really happy when Stalingrad was removed from automatch dont make it comeback.


Its unbelievable that there are still people that think that is my doing.

Myself and monoltihic were asked for CUSTOM MAPS ONLY for the patch the put ALL OF THE MAPS we sent into rotation. (same thing happened to the 2016 map contest, they just casually added 3 maps that were not meant to be added, and lets not even get started on the 2v2 contest)

I don't know how to make this more clear to you or the people that scream this from the rooftops, but the entire time, you are basing your "argument" off of incorrect information, and most of the time intentionally so to either flame me (when i have no control), other mappers or mappers in general, to intentionally misinform others, or all of the above.

Same with the bugs. Vilshanka is not the only map. Hell there are several posts on this forum pointing that out from people who have no games even in 1v1, this bug is effecting the entire map pool. And the bug in question has existed for almost 4 years (from what I recall). Why its more prominent now? No idea, but it is due to the patch. So please educate yourself. Thanks.

Also according the the poll up top from bizrock, it would seem "all" is a bit of a stretch. But then again someone willfully ignorant of all the things that have happened to maps the last years, I guess you would willfully ignore math to suit your back handed remarks.

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 16:51 PMLago


People like you are why we've only got about three mapmakers left.


This.
31 Jan 2019, 17:21 PM
#39
avatar of GiaA

Posts: 713 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 16:51 PMLago


People like you are why we've only got about three mapmakers left.


how about we reduce that number to 0, remove all mediocre to shit maps and stick with langres, crossing, crossroads and faymo? In 2v2 we keep Stadtschutt (good map actually, most mapmakers consider it bad for whatever reason),Alliance of Defiance, R&M, Elst and Eindhoven.
31 Jan 2019, 17:28 PM
#40
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jan 2019, 17:21 PMGiaA


stick with langres

No thanks.
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

442 users are online: 442 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
36 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48939
Welcome our newest member, Ellmjnhiem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM