Profile of Rosbone

UNDER CONSTRUCTION - IS A WORK IN PROGRESS
Last edit on Dec 24, 2020

The first step to making a map is deciding how big to make the map. In the past we had an image floating around that gives us a good starting point:


When I look at a map in the Worldbuilder I like to try and have some metrics(useful data) that will let me compare this map to another map. I started with some basic measurements for size. All distances are in METERS measured in the worldbuilder. For many distances I like to measure from a starting point to the closest point on the capping circle. For base measurements I use the center of the base pizza. This will vary a little between factions and base rotation.



Of course a few measurements do not decide how good/fun a map is. Most players go by 'feel'. Which is something that cant be measured. Ease of movement, pathing, sight blocking, cover placement, retreat paths, etc all are very important parts of a great map.

BASE TO BASE SIZE
The distance from the center of the base pizza to the center of the enemy base pizza. For multiplayer maps I average it the best I can. This tells us how LONG the map is. This is one of the most important sizes. If the map is too short there will be constant pressure and fighting in the middle. If the map is too large you will have units off the field for very long periods. And bad engagements are very punishing. Units that can have forward retreat points may become OP. This metric is also dependent on the base entrance design. For our generic purposes distance is measured in a straight line base to base and pathing is ignored.

FAR TO FAR
The distance between the important points on the side of the map. This is usually the distance between the outside VPs but can also be fuel or munition points. This tells us how WIDE the map will feel and play. If the map is too narrow, team weapons can become OP and lock down entire sides of the map. If the map is too wide, the enemy can flank better but you also run the risk of the enemy getting behind you and wiping squads on retreat.

VP TO VP
The distance between the outside VPs. This is usually the same as the FAR TO FAR distance. In 1v1 maps, this distance lets you know how hard it is to harass all three VPs. In 2v2 and up games, this distance dictates how long the match will go. If the VPs are too far apart it will be hard to hold all three at once. And the games will be very long and turn into slamming your head against team weapon walls on the mid VP. For most 2v2 players this is a terrible thing.

FUEL TO FUEL
Most games will focus on fuel harassment. This distance tells us how fast/urgent the map may feel. In team games fuel is everything since unit timings are increased. More fuel equals faster vehicles and even more map dominance.

NUMBER OF CUTOFFS
Most maps try to use a territory point(TP) to cutoff the fuel for a side. Some maps will use two cutoffs that cut ALL resources for that side. Depending on the layout this can ruin a map. If a map has a single strong cutoff, all of the fighting in the match will be at that cutoff. If a map has two strong cutoffs they should be placed far enough away from each other that all of the fighting does not take place at the cutoffs. You should never really design around a faction because it will change, but certain factions may have an easier time attacking a cutoff. So you do not want them to be too strong.

CUT TO CUT
The distance between cutoff points on one side of the map. This implies a two cutoff map. If the distance is too short the cutoffs will dominate play. In 2v2 and up games, easy access cutoffs will let OST use CLOSE THE POCKET and meme destroy your trapped armies. But even in team games, cutoffs can be used effectively to force armies to move and not build static defense walls.

SAFE VP
Does the map have safe VPs? If the VPs are too safe you will have very long boring games where armies clash on the middle or easiest accessed VP point. Each player will hold the easy VP and the final battles will be at the hardest VP. It is not normally a good idea to have safe VPs.

SAFE FUEL
Each game mode has different requirements for safe fuels. For 1v1 and 2v2 having a safe fuel is a good thing. More for 2v2 than 1v1. Many 2v2 players prefer a safe fuel, so in random automatch, they do not have to rely on their team mate to get the fuel. If you get an unbalanced team and your weak player is on the fuel side, you will have no fuel all game long and lose. So the fuel should be about 2/3 of the distance to the front line. This way it is safe but can still be harassed by the enemy.

1v1 MAP POOL MAP METRICS

Map Name	Base-Base	Far-Far	Vp-VP	Fuel-Fuel	Cut #	Cut-Cut	safe VP	safe Fuel
Faymonville	207	248	248	166	2	68
Vilshanka	227	230	143	153	2	73		Yes
Crossroads	231	214	190	214	2	102		Yes
Angoville	250	288	190	170	1		Yes
Langreskaya	256	250	120	250	2	81		Yes
Crossing	265	275	183	275	2	95
Kholodny	279	282	234	209	2	115		Yes
Arnhem	293	306	207	247	2	60		Yes

THOUGHTS ABOUT THE 1v1 MAP POOL
Faymonville has the shortest base to base distance (207m):
1) Matches will have a lot of action.
2) This may lead to a lot of fighting in the middle.
3) Snipers may be strong since they can retreat and be back fighting very fast. Depends on amount of sight blocking used.
4) Indirect fire may be OP since units can be close to the safety of their own base and still have a far reaching effect.

Arnhem Checkpoint has the longest base to base distance (306m):
1) Matches may be slow since it will take time to retreat and field units.
2) Engagements are very important in order to have a field presence.
3) Engagement wins can be more rewarding since you will have more time to cap territory.

Langreskaya has very short VP to VP distance (120m):
1) Will be easier to hold all three VPs so matches may be fast and decisive.
2) Depending on sight blocking, matches may end in a spearhead weapon wall type fight. Since a couple MGs can cover the entire front line between VPs.

Crossing in the woods has the farthest Fuel distances (275m):
1) It may be hard to hold both fuels since armies will be spread very wide.
2) The fuels are not safe so the longer distance is not as punishing. They can be harassed easier.

Arnhem Checkpoint has a very short CUT TO CUT distance (60m):
1) At 60m the cutoff points are too close together. The map resources can be dominated by rushing the cutoffs and locking them down.
2) Note maps like Faymonville and Vilshanka also have a short distance, but the sight and path blocking favor the players base and are much less punishing. The cutoffs are also close to the base to allow for a quick response to a decap.

WHAT IS A GOOD 1v1 STARTING SIZE
From these metrics and a guess at how popular maps are, we can guess:
1) A good base to base distance is about 230-250m. As Faymonville feels a little small and Kholodny Ferma feels a little large. Note, the amount of sight/pathing blockers used will make a map feel larger or smaller if movement is constricted.
2) A good Far distance is about 220-250m. This depends on the type of point on the outside. If the point is a munition, more space can be added as this rewards players for capping far away. But you do not want fights at these extreme widths or wipes will occur.
3) A decent VP distance is about 150-200m. Depending on sight blocking, this spreads out the fighting enough to weaken team weapons and allows for VP harassment.
4) Fuels can be anywhere from 170-200m apart depending on sight blocks and cutoff placement. You do not want it very hard to hold the fuel and cutoff. But the cutoff has to be meaningful. You want players to have to move about and not play static defensive styles.

From all of these metrics we can say that maps like Crossroads may be popular. It hits the sweet spot on many of the metrics. Although, as pointed out by JPA32, crossroads does not have front base entrances so it feels longer than 230m. This also cuts down the all-play-in-the-middle feel of short maps.

Maps such as Vilshanka are also popular even though they have slightly smaller distances for VPs and Fuels. Vilshanka has tighter sight blocking and pathing to adjust for this. So the overall 'feel' of the map is just right. NOTE: In actual plays Vilshanka is only hindered by the UI bug at the moment.

And on the far side of things we have popular maps like Faymonville and Kholodny Ferma. Which are popular even though they are a little small or a little large. Size is not everything.


4v4 GENERIC MAP SIZES

Map Name	Width	Height	Area (Sq/M)
City 17	544	608	330,752
Sittard Summer	448	704	315,392
General Mud	512	512	262,144
Hill 400	512	512	262,144
Road to Arnhem	512	512	262,144
Lorch Assault	512	480	245,760
La Gleize	480	512	245,760
Lanzerath Ambush	544	448	243,712
Lienne Forest	480	480	230,400
Essen Steelworks	480	480	230,400
Port of Hamburg	480	480	230,400
Steppes	512	448	229,736
Red Ball	544	384	208,896
White Ball	544	384	208,896

Still problems on 64 bit patch...
Big F for the mappatch. So no chance to get it this year anymore...

At this point it does not even matter. No one will be excited for the new maps and 64-bit is not that big of a deal.

We need to fall back to the old ID SOFTWARE line from John Carmack (smartest person in the universe), "It is done, when it is done." Carmack never let us down and we were ok with waiting.

My biggest fear is the ever evolving snowball effect of shit that may follow.

New maps were being tested for the UI bug. Now if it goes away, we will not know why it went away? Was it the reworking we did or the 64-bit patch? So now the next round of map updates may be bugged since we wont know what is happening.

The 64-bit patch may add new issues to maps. So are the new issues from the patch, the reworking, or some evolving bug as each patch changes the behavior of the SCAR code?

And by the time the 64-bit hits, we will be adding the balance patch into the mix.

And with the severe lag being added between updates, Relic is setting themselves up for a huge fall.

I hope they dont. They have people there much smarter than dumb ole me. So here is hoping they got this.

Since it is taking so long, there should be some new maps added as well, so at least we have some fresh meat to chew on? Only seems fair to me. Olvadi has been working some new 2v2 stuff. We could use another 2v2 map I would think?

Please god no!!! If anything, just delete all mortar units from the game. More RNG than throwing wet shit into a fan. Kills the game.

The important question is: How to reduce FPS drops in teamgames.
1v1 has no fps drops throughout the 1h game. 2v2 has some, once both sides are at 100 cap. 3v3 starts getting stuttery at 15-20 minute mark. 4v4 is a general shit***w unless you have a brutal system.

My guess is that larger game modes increase the two largest time killers: FOW and Pathing.

vCOH calc'ed FOW like once every second. COH2 seems to do it almost every frame. And it takes a bit of time to do if done on the CPU as opposed to the GPU. Dont know where Relic does it. Maybe they moved to GPU for Coh2.

Pathing just takes time in general. You have to guess all the possible pathways and find the shortest difference. So bigger modes = more units pathing, more units blocking pathing, larger maps so you need to do this calc a lot more, etc. This is probably all CPU based for 2013 code? Units also seem to favor red cover so vehicles get a speed boost on roads. But vCoh fans remember units that had to path long distances would just stop halfway there because they could not figure out a path anymore and their stored path got blocked.

Larger game modes also have more artillery/tanks/mortars/AT going which means adjusting terrain height, terrain cover, terrain impass(pathing), terrain precise map(pathing unit width), terrain texturing, etc all on the fly while things are blowing up.

I am always amazed the game runs at all. So kudos to Relic for the performance they got out of it. My point is dont get your hopes up too high.

I would not expect Relic to have a tournament that bans commanders/factions/etc. That would be a public announcement/acknowledgement that there is a problem with the game.

It was very cool that they at least talked about Zis gun bugs etc in their last big outing.

For now we have AE and others that will make the tourneys fun. Maybe someone should have a small exhibition match called "Break the Meta" so players have to play against meta using a non meta commander. They get paid the same win or lose. And then maybe we will see something that could counter the current stuff.

Thanks to the couple pros here that talked about Ostruppen being OP. Now we just wait for the nerfs.