Profile of Tric

Feedback for Normandy

From the screen it looks like the fog might be a bit rough too. Myself and VonIvan should be playtesting this tonight and post any follow ups.

Object limit, could potentially be the problem.

And on top of that why are they even keeping two identical moscow maps, kek? Imo balance starts with the maps not the factions and since there are so many talented map makers like trick why nobody is fixing the years old problems? On top of that they added pripyat sector, a cramped map with only 2 victory points and literally 0 cover. I mean who even makes those kinds of maps and who is stupid enough to add them to automatch? Or lisores river where the game takes twice as long as it would normally take because of the frikkin bridges. So many questions so few anwsers

I love how you say "talented map makers like tric(k)" and then down the line "I mean who eve makes those kinds of maps and who is stupid enough to add them to automatch"

All the 2v2 maps were added with 10 day notice (if i recall correctly and they wanted 5 not 4) and lisores was outright stolen from stahaghel and adapted by myself and mono (mostly mono), and pripyat was still in testing and was slotted to be opened up more (in the middle) and given 2 more vps. I really like how you say pripyat is "cramped" when it is the size of a 3v3 and there is "literally no cover" when it is argueably covered in cover.

Also your opinion of the balance starts with the maps and not the factions, is and will forever be inherently wrong. It is 90% game design, 10% map design.

How are mappers supposed to map around... demos, garrison abuse, indirect fire abuse, sim city, call-ins, camping, 1 click arty RNG (devm vs vonivan?), lack of garrison clearing options, lack of snares, ect; the list goes on and on and on. This becomes even more true when they fuck with the stats every 6 months on things. Imagine if you will if the mortar pit range was increased by 30m, half the maps in 1v1 would become literally unplayable as you could put the pit in your base and cover over half the map (as is the case now on some maps to begin with)

I mean hell, by your logic VonIvan lost to devm on famyonville because of map design, not the fact that RNG arty decimated him.

A map that design is an issue is Pripyat, whoever is able to camp the mid wins, and even then the game drags on and typically favors axis. This WAS KNOWN when it was submitted, yet it was put in automatch, was this my doing? Nope.

Lets not even start on the fact that when we send in updated maps, they don't get added because Relic is severely undermanned. Case in point, westwall and halbe, both have been updated for months and neither versions was ever added (matter of fact westwall had the WRONG version added). Furthermore, when the maps are updated next to nobody (outside select top players) will even try them again. Everyone goes back to the comfort zone of the maps that they have been playing on for years, the meta changes but the maps don't (when ost mechanized was a thing, you didnt see people NOT trying it on crossing/crossroads/langres/famonv ect; ). They are familiar so people more readily adapt their playstyles to favor the map, this is not the case with community maps. 75% or more of the players lose on the map 1 time (the first time) and will forever and a day blame the map, veto it, and never play it again and go right back to their comfort zone. This is not to say that there might not be something wrong with a map, but when the whole of the community is more willing to look at the thing they know the last about (map making) and blame it. It really lead to anything getting done. Over half this community can't even articulate why the hell a map may be bad to begin with outside "it sucks and i hate it". Yet everyone openly acknowledges all kinds of shit wrong with the balance of the game, and somehow we are supposed to make "fair maps" when the balance is in flux, and when you lose on the map its the mappers fault and not the balance EVERYTIME? That makes literally zero sense.

There may be cases where it is indeed a map balance problem (and is most likely very easy to fix), but why would we bother? Mappers are the scapegoat of this community, we get nothing but shit for something that 90% of the time we have no control over.

...

I'm saying is that we will never get anything but the same tired shit. Because the game is imbalanced and currently we have nothing to do besides "rural soviet farmland #1, rural soviet farmland #2".

This is due to many things, but mainly due to patches. Imagine if all the sudden shocks were OP (buffed beyond logical reason) and then everyone wanted CQC maps. Imagine if indirect fire ranges were adjusted further augmenting that certain maps (crossroads would be absolute cancer and langreskya would be in the same boat), as both are already cheesed to begin with.

What is also funny is when the maps were first introduced, plenty of top players didn't veto maps and actually ENJOYED playing on the new playstyles instead of the same tired bullshit that you suggest all through this thread.

You also say the "three i mentioned" don't play well. You do realize that westwall was 5th overall in most play until the patch for penals come out, correct? Its almost like, when the patches change maps become easy to blame and the balance takes a back seat. As smith said 90% game design, 10% map design.

Oh and bryansk was a favorite for a time as well. And Halbe was voted in as the BEST MAP by top players from the 1v1 tourney, so once again, its almost like the patch completed changed on the dynamic of how the maps worked.

Then all of these were changed (outside bryansk) and NEVER updated. It is almost like we do make maps, like you suggest, but then get the shaft by having them never be updated in the endless cycle of bullshit that is the current state of balance.

Also you referencing any vCoH maps is completely irrelevant. They have tons of games mechanics that completely change how the game is played from 1 game to the next. Making a vcoh map was EASY in comparison to all the stupid shit you have to account for in coh 2, and then it all changes in a patch and you have to wait 6 months before the next one.

Also I whole-heartedly agree with Rommel with this hysterical comment "we want nice rural maps that work and have distinct character without being overbearing.", that completely counterpoints itself. Nice rural maps, BUT WITH CHARACTER. I am not going to spend hours upon hours making and then testing the maps, just to make a variation of "Not another soviet farmland" map. Sorry but it just becomes more and more obvious you don't understand the limitations of the builder in any respect. There is only so many ways you can make a fucking field or a grove of trees.

The other reasons that the "great maps" have low vetoes is they are also a comfort zone, they have been around the longest and are the easiest for people to adapt on, since they have been played on with no changes for years, and even then most top 50 players have varying opinions on what maps they actually prefer as their top 3.

You want 10 great maps? I can easily rotate the top 5 most played and make them all urban/industrial. The first thing everyone would do is cry. "Not another urban map", "its so claustrophobic", "CQC units rape everything here", ect; But when you look and replace all the cover with trees instead of building rows, all the sudden its fine. Are all the maps perfect? No. Will they ever be? No. Why? Cause of asymmetrical design that is still in flux.

This has nothing to do with art either. Yah my maps, rommels, monos, whiteflash, stahagels, onkelsams, invictus, nebaka, capiqua, ect... they all look nice. It happens when you know how to use the builder, me putting down a splat doesn't effect balance. Garrison cheese, indirect fire abuse, and 1 "acceptable" opening build order do.

Edit: Forgot the shining gem of "Remove creativity to become a better mapper". The entire process of making a map is creative. You are doing literally only that, creating, but hey lets limit it.