You have really good points, I guess I tried to capture this with higher level live casts on the maps. If we had some people with video editing skills (I sure as hell don't), I could get together content to explain the maps (at least mine) and try to get any others available. This would be a pretty large undertaking overall though, as each video would be anywhere from 1-3 minutes in length.
I would be glad to help with this in anyway possible and come up with a format. Once my IRL stuff the next few days dies down. I have A LOT of things I need to get going on here.
There was a good video, I saw earlier from one of the maps that didnt win. I think it was stanvicks "nevel" map.
Edit: I was right, here is the vid I'm referencing, we could try to do something similar to this.
There are a few of us who would love to actually work with them on a more intimate level, but currently that seems very hard to get with their current manpower situation when it comes to coh 2.
Wish you all the luck, and the same for any one else who aspires like this.
I would love to see something like "Designer's notes" on the maps - maybe similar to the map guides - where the map creator explains how the different elements of the map are supposed to play out. What's the idea behind this lane, what function does this house have, etc.
The advantage is that e.g. when the player knows that a certain house is supposed to work as a strongpoint for the Northern team, there are two levels on which feedback can be provided:
- Is is a good thing that the house is a strong point?
AND
- Does the house actually fullfill its intended role?
And of course this also could serve as a general map guide which likely helps in the adoption of the map when it is added into the map pool.
So you mean the entire streaming and brainstorming process?
At first look the pipes all seem random, but they are actually part of how the map performs. Blocking those medium crushways opens a dynamic to the map that to me, is fun and interesting. The reason for this is that the only way we get movement blockers of medium crush or more is that they are ALL heavy cover and half additionally block sight, these are all yellow cover and allow you to see through, which is a mechanic we don't widely see if it all.
You suggested opening up paths, almost all of these were touched on (outside the VP ones) and additionally the east base pathing was opened up more, and the "forever" sight blockers (fuel containers and the large fuel barrel pile) around the middle VP were removed, as it was not clear at the late stages of the map when the entity's were destroyed that they still blocked site.
Also there is another additional medium crush "pass" into the middle plaza area from the west and east building rows, this is to keep indirect fire to being effective, but offering another way for it to be attacked outside of just along the road, this will also give savvy players another opportunity to flank later on with their tanks into the back lines of the opponent.
Also for anyone saying this map is like Stalingrad, it isn't as long as you don't put your units through the meat grinder and focus on one side/get indirect fire.
I would personally love to see a buff to the HT, it should have the ability for armor piercing rounds for a muni cost, so it is more potent against lights. This would give you more options as well and reward people who can keep the thing alive, since it dies to a wet noodle.
I would also like the medic and engineer upgrades to not be locked to specific trucks. AKA, after you build a truck, be it battlegroup, mech, or tier 4, you can CHOOSE what upgrade you want, but can only select one.
Want to rush mech and get healing? BOOM problem solved for the same cost, this would also allow you to build battlegroup into tier 4 and give tier 4 mechs.
The functionality would be similar to vcoh brits with the increased resources upgrade.
These are just some things that would be nice to see.
Wait, this is major information, because the track record since 2013 is that maps don't get changed or updated. Maps have routinely been presented at 100% perfect, finished, l2p in the past. Getting a gap in hedgerows has been like pulling teeth.
Good news that there's chance for these maps to continue to be developed instead of being frozen in place for official implementation.
And people's reactions to the new maps has mostly to do with the overall design, not nuanced balancing of features that are as easy to point out like some people have done.
But I've got to say, you can't exactly tout extensive playtesting and feedback while simultaneously declare that game balance is at fault. Playtesting and feedback are explicitly what are supposed to prevent maps from highlighting game imbalances.
It's one or the other, you've got to pick one: Either the game is broken for map development, or the playtesting and feedback are insufficient (or even flawed.)
In top games most maps held within 1-4% of variance between allied or axis, outside of stomps that were not taken due to skill difference.
What exactly are you having problems with? The editor likes to leave that setting visually on after you start a new scenario, but after you save or exit and reopen, it will undo it. Is this what you are talking about?