Into the forge: 4v4 testing with Xdemption

This is a great lobby, was able to get my map to the point where I wanted it thanks to all the tests. Will be releasing the map soon.

 

Makes sure you grab the new file from my bookmarks. It's labeled "Twice Forsaken" without the version number.

 

Feedback for Sentinel is self-explanatory at this point. A team setting up outside can trap the other team inside and there's nothing you can do about it. The file we made edits to solves all of the maps apparent issues in my opinion and I would like to see something like that done before we test it again. Essentially, it segments the pride rock area into a U shape with a cave behind it for flanking, which also creates a fourth "room" on the map. The front of the U is then pulled in closer towards the middle of the map and the buildings themselves are also pulled in slightly closer, bringing the entire area into pistol RRR. The cave can stay or go but I think the new shape of the map would play a lot better.

There were complaints about deck stronghold, but I wouldn't move that until these changes are explored. If the cave is done right, you can have a teleporter take you north to south instead of east to west like it is now (north being Blue). It's an option though because the teleporter appears to take you in the opposite direction it ought to in the current map layout.

No feedback for Twice Foreskin. I don't like the way the map plays but I could not find any apparent issues.

As for Ashlands, the tests confirmed everything I'd already said was wrong with the design. I only stuck with it this long to see how it'd play with Assault, which ended up being its worst gametype. To be frank, I don't even enjoy symmetric objectives in 4v4 - that should stay in Squad and Big Team Battle - so at this point I do not want to waste more time working on a symmetric map for gametypes I don't want to play. Strongholds and Oddball are just better gametypes in a game with such a shitty spawn system. I'll get around to an asymmetric redesign that maintains the visual theme (as I had originally intended). I otherwise do not intend to continue supporting the current version.

 

I'll lay down some feedback from the three maps I played last night.

Twice Forsaken @SecretSchnitzel

No huge complaints here. I was on the dominating side of the Strongholds game where having rifles was a huge advantage. Schnitzel said he was either going to move or remove the Carbine at level 5, which I think will help a lot. Possibly up the spawn times on the rest of the rifles by 30 seconds or so everywhere else throughout the map.

The only other gameplay concern may be the area above sniper. In both the Strongholds and Oddball games, Multi was able to sit up there with rifles and dominate many other important areas of the map. You may just be able to chalk this up to the other team's lack of a real push to get Multi off of there, or coordinate to make sure he couldn't be as much of a threat, but it may still be something to look into, especially when you get more professional players on it who are more adept at setting up and keeping a cohesive strategy for the map.

One last tidbit, the two-way teleporters made for some very weird situations in Oddball, as the carrier is able to just teleport back and forth over and over again, making him rather hard to kill. Not gamebreaking, and I'm not exactly sure how you could address it, but something to keep in mind.

Rasad @GamerPeepFreaks

Now I know the games we got on Rasad weren't the best in the world, but I can definitely see some potential here. Number one issue that needs to be addressed, one that very well may fix a lot of the other problems with the map, is scaling. The map is simply too big and too wide open. I know it's not what you want to hear or do, but the map needs to be entirely reforged basically. I don't know the exact pieces you used, but for example, everywhere you used a 32x32 block, use a 24x24 or maybe 20x20. I think the map could be about 2/3 the overall size that it is now.

For the rest of this feedback, do consider that it is based on a map that is too big, so like I said, address the scaling issue first, then tackle some of the rest.

I think the basic layout of the map is not necessarily bad or broken. What I personally would like to see, and this just may be my preference, is to make the map a little bit less about large flat spaces with long ramps to get up, down and around those spaces. I'd like to see some more subtle inclines to traverse around different levels of the map, and those inclines should break up the wide expanses of flat space (particularly top mid). Look at the outside area of Eden:

Notice all the inclines that are no taller than that of a spartan? You still accomplish the same overall height increase from rockets to blue base, but it's spread out horizontally to create more dynamic play spaces. Now if you don't want the map to play that way, that's fine, just my preference.

I'm sure you heard the sentiment about the Stronghold locations. I think top mid has the potential to work, I'd have to try it again after a rescale of the map, but the two tower locations just didn't work. I can't give exact suggestions on where to put them, just keep in mind that you usually want to have some sort of playability between Strongholds. If you've ever watched competitive matches of Strongholds on The Rig, it's unbalanced because there's playability between the two outside strongholds, but not with the inside one (BR Base), causing very stale gameplay where the undisputed best strategy is to hold the two outside points. Now I know your map is symmetrical, but consider things like that when deciding where to move your stronghold points.

I think CTF has a chance to really shine on Rasad. The two biggest problems with the CTF game were the campability of flag spawns and the route through bottom mid. I can't remember the geometry of the map exactly, but I think moving the flag spawns to the left or right out from behind the tower would mitigate the camping. As far as the route through bottom mid, I think that especially when you downsize the map it will be a real problem. It's way to easy to run the flag down there, since no one can really see you the whole way. I thought about the possibility of making the tunnels from the bases into bottom mid one-way routes into bottom mid. This would make it so that unless the flag carrier's team has coordinated to throw the flag to a teammate in the tunnel, bottom mid would not be a route to take the flag directly across the map. It would take a bit of geometry reconfiguration, but it could work. Now I think that would make it necessary to create alternate routes out of bottom mid, ones that don't lead directly to the bases, but that's just something to consider if you do make those changes.

Spawning was an issue only insofar as the actual placement of the spawn points. Many spawns had you either facing directly off of an edge or directly into a wall. My general rule of thumb is for each spawn point, to have roughly 2 or 3 seconds of relatively flat space to walk into in front of the spawn. So when I respawn in a game, I want to be able to walk for 2 or 3 seconds in front of me before I run into a wall or an edge. Doing this really helps orient players off the respawn much better.

Lastly, I think you need another route out of the bottom of each base, directly under each tower. Too often I spawned down there and had to run too long to get up anywhere else on the map. This problem may be fixed with the rescale, so consider it for later.

Yesterday

I'll post in the feedback thread.

 

If you got time tonight Rick I would love it if you guys could test Sanctum <3

 

Don't doctors usually test sanctums?

 

Two suggestions - and this is independent of my PM

The tests need to be limited to three playtests per map. Play Slayer once and then play one Objective gametype two times. This way, by the third Objective game, everyone understands how to set up and call out on the map. The reason you play the same gametype twice is because the first test with the gametype will not be representative of how it actually plays. Strongholds for example wont play right the first time until people understand how to set up.

Five playtests however is simply too many tests on a map until it reaches a Beta state, wherein no major changes are needed and the map is playing as intended. The only maps in these lobbies that have been at the point are Brutalist, Marsa and Twice Foresaken. Testing is incredibly important, but if the tests aren't going well, then there needs to be a threshold where it's decided that the map needs changes before it can be tested again. Somebody in the lobby needs to have the authority to determine that a test is not going well and the map should not be played further.

My second suggestion is to limit the time of the feedback sessions. 10+ minutes of oral feedback is a big time sink for most people, especially when tangents are introduced into the conversation. If this is your preferred method of gathering feedback, then I do not intend to take that away. However, some people do not like being put on the spot when it comes to feedback, especially if it's instantly shut down, while others may prefer to type up their feedback in the thread after having taken time to think about it. I think the latter will give you more concise feedback, even though it's possible not everyone in the lobbies will be a member of ForgeHub.

It's great that we have the ability to curate community maps and test them to bring out their potential, but the process needs to be streamlined so that those who participate are not overwhelmed, discouraged or otherwise confused.

 

The feedback from the lobby on Sentinel that I gathered

• The map needs to be smaller to push combat into RRR. This is the very first thing I suggested about the map.
• The buildings need to be disconnected to force players into the middle more
• There needs to be less or no rifles on the map
• The teleporter sender and receiver needs to be switched
• The indoor strongholds might need to move.

If NegativeZero is willing to do these changes, then I think they're all absolutely necessary. At this point however, I think the map is really becoming an entirely different beast. It's possible that it'll be incredibly boring to play when all is said and done. Sometimes what makes a map play well are its imbalances, and if you try too much to fix it, you just end up with a sterile empty shell.

 

Demption I'd like to submit my map serenity for entrance into the testing lobby if you have the room for it.

 

I just wanted to take the time to thank you @Demption and @A 3 Legged Goat for pushing these lobbies to the limit. It is a huge service and as you guys refine and streamline the process I'm sure it will keep growing and growing. Keep killing it with this lobby man. Really deep in-depth feedback is really great and taking the time to help build up these maps over time will help the community evolve as a whole.

 

12:30 AM? You must be smoking crack son. That time if night I'm trying to wind down from gaming.