WARHOLIC submitted a new map: Recurve - An 8v8 symmetrical BTB map inspired by Longbow from Halo 4. Read more about this map...
Easily the weakest map of the release. There is no consistency with spacing throughout the map, where some spaces will be inconceivably claustrophobic, while others will be open death planes. The bases are unintuitive with their top structures offering too much protection for the advantage they provide. The Snipe Tower is absurdly over powered, especially given the proximity of the Splinter Turrets located nearby, which can be utilized to deadly efficiency in locking the tower down. The small rock cliff approaches do help alleviate the area's choke pointed traits, but they're poorly scaled and difficult to move along. Possibly the most irritating trait of the map is how poorly the player pathing is for vehicles, as the Warthogs have little room to navigate in most areas of the map, and given their top heavy nature, are prone to flipping over. All in all, not a bad map, but certainly not the caliber of map expected for Match Making.
There are two obvious negatives with this map. The first is that the sniper tower ridge is definitely the central area of combat. If I ever end up playing Slayer on this map, I know that when in doubt, head there, because half of the enemy team is usually there. The other main negative is that there is really not much room for vehicles. And with the bit of room that there is, it is cramped, and full of easy areas for pedestrians to board and take the vehicle. Despite this however, I still enjoy the map a lot. I think Strongholds plays really well on it, except that sniper tower can be super hard to take.
This simply doesn't feel like a Fated Fire map to me, so I'm not surprised 343 mutated the map. I remember when I first started forging and Fated warned me against a strong central tower. It is definitely a more infantry based BTB map which is fine with me, but the abundance of turrets combined with the weak vehicle lanes is a little too much. I think this could be a great map though. I actually love how the map offers little room for the scorpion, which naturally nerfs it. This good so that it doesn't turn into a snowball for the team that controls it. The fact that it's flanked by two rocket turrets though makes the bottom of the map a no mans land, because the risk reward just doesn't seem balanced.
I love the base layout for Recurve and how there's a basement for a Warthog to drive through, a first level for some CQC, and a top level with some good sightlines and a turret to guard the flag.
Recurve is unplayable to me. I hate the map. Whenever it comes up, I close Halo, restart it, and then search for another map again. Not only did 343 make a complete atrocity out of what looked like would have been a good map originally, but the overall look of the map is absolute crap as well. The colors don't mix, the rocks are pieces of playdoh clay, and the mixing textures of the terrain pieces are barbaric. I know aesthetic is the last thing on anyone's mind, but in whole, Recurve is a massive thumbs down from me.
I have a very strong distaste for this map. It's going to get me banned one day if it keeps coming up. This map is way too open. Even the enclosed pathways connected to Middle Tower feel like sniper deathtraps. (Doesn't help the sniper spawns right next to those pathways.) What's with the singular scorpion? I get that 343 want players to abuse the powerful tools on the map to get an advantage, BUT A TANK? Vehicle paths. There are none. It almost feels like the smaller vehicles have no place to go except into the path of the scorpion. The bases are... okay? I guess. They don't really feel like bases to me. More like a building you'd see on the side of a map. They're too open on the inside and too blockaded on the outside. Needs more hallways/paths/walls/cover on the inside. Something you can easily defend.
Although your design is essentially "Bad Blood 2" and shares zero design similarities to Longbow, I can't help but wonder which would play better. 343 changed the map ENTIRELY because you didn't do what they asked for. Instead of reshaping Longbow to make it function better, you simply remade your H2A map. Now Longbow was never a good map to begin with but had potential nonetheless. Recurve in its current state has a multitude of problems. Jumps, weapons, spawns, layout, vehicle play room, and the list goes on. That is 343's fault, (mostly) but we are all familiar with their skills at making forge maps. If you would have actually tried to improve Longbow we would not be stuck with the trainwreck they gave us. Your design looks like a slightly improved Bad Blood, but is hard to tell through images. I know you'll remake it anyway so that is just a matter of time. Attempting to judge the map off the design, it looks like there would be little to no vehicle-player interaction. It is not something required in BTB, but is almost expected. If you did plan on making vehicles part of it I would recommend switching up the bottom level with natural terrain or something. BB H2A suffered from restrictive and flat ghost gameplay. I am looking forward to your (original vision) of Recurve, despite it having nothing to do with Longbow.
If you compare my second Maya image to the Longbow concept above, you can notice strong design similarities in structure, pathing, and flow. Similar base positioning, outer vehicle/infantry paths up to the central structure, short 'caves' up to top mid, segmented courtyards with two vehicle paths, and elevated bridges connecting mid-court to the central structure. The lower edge is inspired by Longbow's low edge as well, just significantly re-positioned with more directional vehicle flow. I just decided to mass out my routes with purple primitive geometry instead of natural terrain, but the scaling is quite similar. My reimagined bases and central structure were designed to be far more vertical/multi-leveled than those on Longbow as well, designing both to include 3 levels with exposed top routes and protected underpasses for both vehicle and infantry movement. My original vision was smaller scaled, faster paced, and more CTF-focused than the original Longbow design, and players could make big plays much faster off spawn as a result of that reimagination. In regards to your concern about little to no vehicle-infantry interaction, my original vision was designed to enable the exact opposite. No part of the map was safe in my original vision; light vehicles can go anywhere infantry can go, creating huge movement incentive and a huge movement/combat skill gap for both vehicles and infantry by maximizing interaction between the two. Vehicles and infantry interacted on every level of every route and structure on my original vision of the design, as every part of the map was also a core part of the vehicle circuit. Your comparisons to Bad Blood are fair, as that design did inspire parts of my original vision, but I would argue that what I originally created at 343 is actually far closer to Longbow both structurally and functionally than the current state of Recurve. Anyway, thanks for your post and feedback, and I agree with many of your concerns with the current state of the map.
Super solid base designs. Seems like they did a really good job with fixing it up after you guys left. Vehicles and weapons I feel were terribly reiterated but that's an easy fix. The top mid structure is a little cramped but if the cover was taken out and it was opened, I think it would pretty much fix the rest of the issues it has.
You're design seemed so distorted and scaled differently to the point of where I wouldn't even refer to it as a loose inspiration. In regards to your concern about little to no vehicle-infantry interaction, my original vision was designed to enable the exact opposite. No part of the map was safe in my original vision; light vehicles can go anywhere infantry can go, creating huge movement incentive and a huge movement/combat skill gap for both vehicles and infantry by maximizing interaction between the two. Vehicles and infantry interacted on every level of every route and structure on my original vision of the design, as every part of the map was also a core part of the vehicle circuit. I assume you are referring to ghosts and mongooses. Allowing these "light" vehicles access to all parts of the map doesn't mean they will function well. They need room to stretch and ultimately thrive in vehicle specific areas. For instance, on Halo 4's Complex, you could drive a ghost into the central window room, if taken the right paths. This was possible but not ideal. When incorporating vehicles onto maps, you need to think about how they will move around and how vulnerable the driver becomes with each position. Allowing light vehicles to scale player traversable structures may create an illusion that nowhere is safe, but in turn generates bad flow, wasted vehicles, or certain death. Just make sure that if you do implement light vehicles that you design specific areas for them before placing them, and not just designing larger walkways and placing down a ghost after the fact.
Light vehicles refers to ghosts and warthogs, and this debate is ultimately a matter of traditional vehicle-specific area design versus squad design philosophy. Vehicle-specific areas are fundamentally flawed because they greatly empower vehicle pilots while severely disempowering infantry, creating a severe counter-play imbalance when forcing vehicle-infantry interaction in those areas. Vehicles are power weapons in concept, and crafting areas specifically designed to further empower power weapons creates overpowered scenarios (such as spawning a sniper rifle in the best position to use it). Traditional vehicle-specific area design is counter-intuitive for map flow due to the creation of overpowered areas, and ultimately makes players feel as if they are forced to sprint just to simply traverse & survive the space. I am fundamentally opposed to enlarging dimensions for sprint, and maps (including all vehicle routes within) should always be scaled so that sprinting is never necessary. Squad design philosophy optimizes all routes for vehicle-infantry interaction, balancing empowerment and providing sufficient counter-play opportunities for both. It completely removes the presence of overpowered vehicle areas, and when compared to traditional vehicle-specific area design, significantly raises the movement and combat skill gap for vehicle pilots. In squad design, pilots must gain significant map knowledge to reach a high level of effectiveness against evenly empowered infantry opponents. Vehicle flow is tighter and more directional, encouraging pilots to thoroughly plan their course of attack before engaging. It fosters a higher level of competitive play and superior movement incentive design. My original vision for Recurve used squad design philosophy as a core design pillar.
This statement itself is fundamentally flawed. Allowing players to pilot a vehicle in an undesirable environment for the vehicle specific mechanics is either one of two things. The first of which being inadequate map design, and the second being poor vehicle choice, if any. Designing vehicle specific areas are what makes vehicles themselves "power weapons." Allowing the vehicles to be used to their full potential. Placing vehicles on a map without proper play space essentially nerfs them to the point of them not being enjoyable or practical. Using your logic would be the same as placing a sniper rifle on "Chiron TL-34." It is the worst possible environment for a long range weapon, but using the same logic, placing it on a map with long sight lines only makes the weapon overpowered. That is an absolutely silly way of looking at map design and suggest you rethink your strategy. I don't expect you to take anything out of what I'm saying as you are clearly decided in your ways. Best of luck on Bad Blood 2.
I can get out off the map, my gamer tag is Nadendary send me a message on Xbox if you want to know how, also walked around the Forge map and dang it's huge plus the new Forge Word 2.0 map has a little glitch in it also
The bases that were largely vacant before have now become integral locations for map dominance. These bases have been moved closer to the center of the map and have seen a major reconstruction in their interior play space. The map is now highly explorable, allowing players to navigate inside or on top of many of the structures. As with any successful map, no one power position offers complete flexibility. While the sniper perch is the most contested location on the map, a large portion of the players’ view is blocked by scenery. Additionally, a strong glare from the sunset makes for an unconventional hindrance to the sniper’s line of sight. Although some players have experienced issues with spawning, the map is otherwise very well balanced and is a welcome addition to the arsenal of big team maps.
I actualy looked up this map just to **** on it after having to dashboard and quit so much while trying to play the much needed additions to btb. But i can see nothing else needs to be said. It sounds like 343 is to blame? They also made basin so i'm not suprised. I don't question 343s ability at map design by any means, just feels rushed.
Sadly I don't have much to offer in regards to making this map a better overall experience, but I have one area of interest I feel I could address. Seriously, remove the massive rocks on the sides of the middle pathway, or at least push them down to be level with the slope. Even though it provides cover for players down to the side... It's too funneling, prevents a ton of movement (i.e. players trying to make their way out, from down there) and stops much needed engagements between the two teams; vehicles or otherwise. Screenshots of what I mean included: http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/PolyGoner/screenshot/4365825 http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/PolyGoner/screenshot/4365826 http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/PolyGoner/screenshot/4365828 I've actually managed to drive the Warthog down there, and make my way back out through the underpass a few times after these changes.