One thing I am doing on my current 1v1 project is paying close attention to map geometry that can be used to punish a player for Constantly "RUNNING AWAY". Example - Think of Rock paper scissors. Lets say we are fighting at rock and my opponent dips out and goes to paper. I should have to option to either chase him to paper or go to scissors to cut him off. I am trying to apply this concept to each area of my map. If we are fighting and you dip out you give me option to go to a counter spot. So this concept makes it where your opponents either has to finish the fight where you both stand or give position up to you and vise versa. Each fight should always determine something, either a kill or potential map positioning and if your opponent is always running that means you always have the map positioning advantage because something always checks something else. I hope this kinda helps
That makes a lot of sense, I'll have to rework my blockout so that different areas can check one another. If I had a map example of the checks and balances, it would help a lot. I understand that higher positions generally hold more power, but how would I go about checking multiple high areas? It sounds pretty difficult.
Well one thing I do is the higher up you go the more exposed you become and you can have areas that can be lower and have advantage. Example your opponent is standing on a plateform and has nothing to hide behind but they have height advantage. But you are on a "slighty" lower platform but have a column/barrier/door you can hide behind and strafe in and out from or around. The advantage would go to the person on the lower plateform due to having more options. You can shoot him a few times and duck/hide and then pop out when ever you want to continue. You dictate the flow of the fight(Based on even skill level) Just remember that if your opponent is running you should have the option to cut him off, this does not mean you need to be infinitely advantage. Just slightly for making the right play call based upon your opponent choices. In 1v1 fights always think about the next step. If your doing this and my opponent is doing that, I could do this to stop that. Doing all this during the design phase of a map will help a lot in terms of designing 1v1 maps. My current 1v1 map isnt in a visable state and I dont want to show the sketch-up or map until I have it fully flushed out (Plus I am trying to win the contest HAHAHAHA). I would watch a few games that are based around 1v1s like Quake or Unreal Tournament. In those games map positioning and movement is more important than killing. At higher level play those games are often vary low scoring because both players are constantly moving around to get advantage. Granted they also have fast weapon/armor timers that require you to move MORE but even the person not grabbing the weapons/armor always have the option to be in a PLACE that has advantage. In 1v1s your map should cater to two main points first.....1. Actively Killing each other. This is just TWO guys who just dont back down from nothing Just run straight to the opponent and fight and die and Repeat. this is people who rely on GUN/Controller SKILL.....2. Players who care about map positioning. This is where TWO people can simply run around the map trying to get advantage and just pop shot each other. They always know where the other player is based opon the check and balances. This makes it becomes more chess based. By catering to these two points you cover the aggressive and passive player base. If your map is balanced then this is where you come out with a good playing map.
So far I've had some mixed reviews on my maps. So one question I wanna ask what people think about is weapons. I know you want mostly tier 1 weapons and whatever. But what about power weapons. I've stuck to tier 2 weapons with limited ammo though I know the sniper can also be a good choice. However, I have had people complain the weapons aren't lethal enough. Also what about ammo. I only gave the majority of weapons on the map a single clip but this hasn't been popular. Also what about how many weapons do you want. Basically do you want your map to focus on pistol encounters or do you want to encourage players to pick up and use better weapons instead to help them gain the edge on their opponent. Please share your thoughts.
Focus on pistol encounters. Use power weapons very very sparingly, limited ammo. You should be out playing the other player, not letting the weapons do it for you.
Not really design based but another issue I think a lot of people are confused about is whether to put team initial spawns or neutral initial spawns and therefore what intro cams do we need. This week Ascend played with teams and Max played without and last week I think was the other way round. Finally will you judges be playing and giving feedback for maps before the deadline as soon as maps are submitted or only after. I just want to get as much testing on mine as possible.
in another thread, it was mentioned that we should be designing the 1v1s for FFA neutral starts. But, I'd imagine due to low pieces needed, that you could set it up both ways and let the host of the match decide. Try to make it play the same both ways???
I personally won't ever setup a 1v1 map with neutral starts. Team specific initial spawns allow me to balance the start of the match as evenly as possible, which is extremely important in 1v1 matches. I honestly don't see any benefit to neutral starts when maps are being graded on gameplay (unless it's for an FFA gametype).
On my map I've got a gunfighter, a tactical magnum, a speed boost and a sniper. Seems unimaginative but the "less is more" approach has been playing well. Weapon balance is way different for 1v1s, I had a Boltshot where the Sniper was and it was comparable in terms of power. The sniper is almost less OP because it requires skill to use. So you have to throw the "Tier" approach out the window, IMO. Maybe try reducing the weapon set to magnums variants only, and then building it up from there? That's how I went about it, I placed the speed boost and had no pickups to start, and then slowly added lower tier stuff where I needed it. Also I feel like feedback has to be taken in context on a 1v1. If you get two really sweaty players in there, and then have a match with two forgers with mediocre skill, they are gonna have pretty different opinions on how it plays. If you can find some really competitive players to test the map for you, I'd recommend picking their brains and gearing it more towards their feedback. Cause a to me a good 1v1 map is a place where two really good players go to settle a score. That's been my approach at least, hopefully it's helpful.