Asymmetric vs. Symmetric

Asymmetric maps are generally viewed as 'better' for games like Slayer, OddBall, and other non-base gametypes (see: or single based), whereas (at least from my experience and point of view) Symmetric maps are better for flag type games; like multibomb, 2 flag, stockpile and King of the hill.

For the help with actually building an asymmetric map, look at maps like Guardian and the others you listed as examples; then I suppose the best bet would be change what you don't like about them for what you like about the other maps.
If you want to be totally original, that's OK too; but I don't have very much advice for doing that.

 

This is very opinion based, and gametype based. I prefer symmetric maps over asymmetric. My main point is that not even bungie can balance an asymmetric correctly. Not in halo reach at least. Reach severely lacks in symmetric maps in multiplayer. Most symmetric maps play well with multi flag and slayer gametypes. Asymmetric maps typically work best with FFA, One flag, and KOTH type stuff. It is so hard for someone to make a good asymmetric map because of all of the variables that go into it. Spawn areas, weapons, lines of sight, routes between bases, etc.


TL;DR

Symmetric maps are better.

also, Pinnacle, the cage? what? those maps have terrible spawning and balance issues.

 

I think he meant he want to make a map with an open area in the centre; and then listed those as examples.

 

When designing a symmetric, concepts are very, very easy. In addition, balance is also easier to create. Which is why symmetric maps tend to be better in general because they're easier to make, therefore there are more good symmetric maps than there are asymmetric ones. But, asymmetric maps give you twice the amount of creativity, and twice as much possibility.

To me, asymmetric maps, GOOD asymmetric maps, are better, simply for the reason that they are more diverse in their nature, so gameplay becomes more diverse and interesting.

 

I make asymmetrical maps because I usually can't make each side the exact same lol. They're also more of a challenge to balance and what not. It's just a more fun map making experience imo

 

Assymetric is extrmly hard to make. I am making one now and its turning out decent. I just have to finish geometry and remove camping spots.

Now im not a guy fOr LoS but I basically go like this. HRHR (high risk, High reward) areas have many lines of sight leading into them.

What you should make depends on the gametype. Infection, FFA, KoTH, Juggernaut, safe havens, One side objective games and invasion work best on assymetric. Two sided objective games, Team games and Invasion Slayer work best on symetric.

 

Technically speaking, you can take map geometry that favors one side of a map and use weapon placement to balance everything equally. So if you find you have built a map that's a bit one sided in terms of advantageous areas, you can partly fix that by weighting that area with fewer power weapons. Or you could change geometry, either way. It's a bit harder to find that perfect balance in asymmetric maps, but given enough play testing, just about any map can achieve it.

I used to build symmetrical maps, but now I've been building asymmetrical maps for Reach. I find it to be more fun, personally, from a forger's perspective.

 

A well-balanced asymmetric map is a thing of beauty. It's just so damn hard to make one. But they feel like real spaces and they tend to be unpredictable and varied in their gameplay. The vast majority of symmetrical maps feel vaguely like they were pumped out of a machine for a perfect, perfectly boring gameplay experience.

I've had some enjoyable games on symmetric maps of course. But every map I've ever really loved was asymmetric or what I call "fake-symmetric," where a lot of aspects of the map are duplicated in different areas, but there are still major differences between them so that you can easily tell which side you're on, and the cover and strategy for the two sides is not identical.

 

This. I love asymmetric maps as I feel it gives a lot more flexibility. The downside is that trying to make them balanced can be a *****.

 

This kinda, I generally like symmetry but that's just my personal opinion.

Been able to make a asymmetric map have symmetrical quality's like balance makes for a interesting game.

Basically main difference is slayer in symmetric everyone has same advantages and disadvantages from start meaning people even chance at planing the same tactics and counter tactics etc(so both teams rushing middle doing nothing else would be best players win). Assymetric has different advantages and disadvantages from start meaning different teams have different options and tactics but to still have same amount of tactics and counter tactics etc(so both teams rushing middle doing nothing else one team would probably have an advantage but then disadvantaged team can do "this" to get advantage but then first team can do "this" to get advantage and so on so its still balanced).

Really I can't pick which is better both good in there own way, But I generally like symmetry but that's just my personal opinion.