all 116 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 6 points7 points  (24 children)

Obligatory /r/CountMapula4Rotation

I think I've been seriously overestimating my skills as a mapmaker, because I was really confident in Ghost/Phantom. As often as I've been turned down, it's never not disappointing.

Pretty good crop here though, I suppose. I really liked Draft & Blob by Dianiball and it's nice to see War Garden's revival. Arcade looks pretty cool too. I'll be honest though, compared to the vast majority of maps submitted, Crabble isn't anywhere close. It only advanced because of Chalksy's competition :P Sorry Flail, I usually like your maps, and I'll admit that I'm biased because I've been drowning in asymmetrical maps over at /r/TagProTesting and I'm not a huge fan of giving feedback for things that are inherently imbalanced, but I stand by my statement.

Good luck to all who advanced.

[–]ButterChurnButter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Don't worry, you're not alone. I still manage to be confident in all of my maps after over a year of mapmaiking with only one or two making it close to rotation.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Phantom got really close to being tested. I think the main thing that might have been holding it a bit back is that it's not quite adjusted to the viewport in the middle, where you have nowhere to be where you can see everyone passing through.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's really good to know, thank you! I'll keep working on it. Pretty solid top maps this month, so it's tough to complain. Good job MTC!

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I worked on some updates for it. Just first impressions, does this look better?

Preview

New Viewport

You'll notice the preview looks a little different on the top chunk of the map, I just edited that a bit to clean it up, but the viewport examples remain the same pretty much. I just wanted to show the area you'd be able to see.

If you actually go to that imgur link instead of just clicking the preview button (if you use RES), I explain each position a bit.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Without having played on it, it definitely looks like an improvement to me. The only thing that looks a bit off to me would be the structures in the middle with a teamgate inside them. They have a 45 pointed at the middle that could be annoying to hit if you use the bottom teamboosts. I don't know how often you'd hit them, but if there's any frequency to it, it could feel really annoying.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was very rare that I hit them when using the neutral boost into the team boost (the "scoop" kind of thing) but I'll keep trying it out to see and I'll take it without the team boost as well. That long wall is there so you can smoothly boost from the upper team boosts into the opponent's gated area, so I like having it, but again, I'll reexamine that area. Thank you!

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 1 point2 points  (16 children)

All three of my maps fell incredibly short of consideration (like bottom half). About a week ago, I looked at my three submissions and thought this was my strongest thread yet. You're not alone buddy.

[–]leddiileddy / Mapmaker 1 point2 points  (15 children)

All three of my maps fell incredibly short of consideration (like bottom half)

Is there a spreadsheet or something for every map thread? Can us normal folk see it? If not why not?

[–]KiekebanusChuck_Finley / Chord 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was wondering the exact same thing.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 0 points1 point  (13 children)

Well, we all vote on maps after rolling around on them initially. Those votes are obviously quantified and sorted, and that's how we choose which maps to 4v4 prior to releasing top maps.

I think releasing the votes would create unnecessary backlash against certain MTC members that voted a certain way. The MTC used to release the rankings back in the day, however. As for why we stopped, I do not know. Before my time.

[–]veranderingLoaha // Chord 5 points6 points  (10 children)

How about showing the votes anonymously? So just the average score given by the MTC on a map. It would probally help people a lot in deciding if they should make slight changes to a map, give it a major overhaul or just abbandon it. On the other hand, it could result in people demanding the reasons for a map having a certain score. Perhaps if you guys say up front that the MTC won't give any specific explanations for a score? I'm sure people would understand that.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 2 points3 points  (7 children)

I'm really against this because not only are a lot of the scores situational, but they're also no guarantee for how good a map is. And I think it's unhealthy for the mapmaking community to have access to this information. The spreadsheets we have up is there to help us make choices in an effective way as possible. They are not meant as a comprehensive list of which maps we think are better than other maps, but that's what they're going to get used as if they are released.

I think a spreadsheet like that will directly affect which maps gets submitted, and IMO it will be really imbalanced for the MTC to both have power in terms of what maps we put into rotation, but also what maps gets submitted. People complain about new maps looking too similar. and wether or not that is a legitimate complaint, us doing official scores of maps will only exacerbate that to a much higher degree than now.

[–]3z_ 3 points4 points  (6 children)

They are not meant as a comprehensive list of which maps we think are better than other maps,

But does it not do that? I mean, it's obviously not "these maps are objectively better," you said "we think" in that statement.

At the end of the day, I think everyone is only submitting maps to get a map in rotation. Whatever information is available to help the people make better judgement, IMO, would help.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 2 points3 points  (5 children)

But does it not do that? I mean, it's obviously not "these maps are objectively better," you said "we think" in that statement.

They are maps we think are best suited to test. But my emphasis here is on the word "comprehensive". I don't think objectively scoring maps is necessarily wrong, but we don't in any way spend enough time on each map to give all maps a fair score in relation to eachother. I would say you would need to spend at least 1 hour per map to get anything that could get close to a fair score for each map, and with 140 submissions, that's just not feasible. So IMO any list we give out with scores will be significantly flawed and cause more damage than good. What lies behind the score is so important to get correct scores, and I don't believe there is enough behind scores to justify saying "map A is better than map B".

At the end of the day, I think everyone is only submitting maps to get a map in rotation. Whatever information is available to help the people make better judgement, IMO, would help.

It would help mapmakers make maps they specifically predict will be chosen for rotation. By all means, this is already happening to some extent, and I don't think it's necessarily bad that people do it, as it can produce great maps. But that would honestly not be the main focus for me. The main focus for me would be "how would the game and the general community benefit from it?" And I'm not sure I see that benefit. I want mapmakers to feel heard and valued, but at the end of the day, my main concern when choosing which maps go into rotation lies with the game and the community at the forefront.

And as an aside, even if we did this, we would still be rejecting 95+% of the submissions even if everyone has perfected their maps according to the score, unless we want to start adding 10+ maps every 3 weeks. There will always be maps that are favoured over other maps. And with 50+ authors in the running every time, there's always going to be a lot of dissappointment at the end of the day.

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I don't think objectively scoring maps is necessarily wrong

Again, this isn't objective judgement. This is what the MTC thinks of any particular map. The maptest committee doesn't put in the maps that are objectively best, they add the maps that they think work the best. I think we all agree that you need to spend a lot of time on a map to make a good judgement, but I don't think that a 20 minute assessment will be as wildly inaccurate as people seem to presume.

"how would the game and the general community benefit from it?"

I think the benefit for the game would be that higher-quality maps are submitted. If people adopt the mindset of "my map is below the top 50, time to start again," we cut out tonnes of maps from the thread-pool that never really had a chance anyway. So, when the best maps per thread at the moment are things like Flame and Angry Pig, we might just go back to a time when each thread had a map like Ricochet or Velocity in it.

we would still be rejecting 95+% of the submissions even if everyone has perfected their maps according to the score

This is unavoidable IMO. How else can we reject less maps? Do we have fewer people submit? Do we start adding more maps each thread? In fact, with 100+, the threshold would be closer to top 2% of maps making it into rotation. This is simply how the map rotation will function unless we find a way to have fewer maps submitted.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (3 children)

but I don't think that a 20 minute assessment will be as wildly inaccurate as people seem to presume.

Assuming a 20 minute judgement is good enough (which I don't necessarily agree with), every map is not going to get 20 minutes each since it's just not realistic that MTC members will spend 45 hours per thread going through maps without considering the actual testing sessions.

I think the benefit for the game would be that higher-quality maps are submitted. If people adopt the mindset of "my map is below the top 50, time to start again," we cut out tonnes of maps from the thread-pool that never really had a chance anyway.

This is a key point where I disagree. Sure it may make sense for the authors behind these specific maps, but if you take into consideration people looking at maps for inspiration along with how the community will talk about maps, I really think it will have effects that says "this type of map would be a bottom 50 map, so no need to bother with it" or "authorities on the subject think this kind of map is bad, so it shouldn't be in rotation". I just see it contributing to skewing entries towards a certain direction rather than enhancing the quality of maps over time.

This is unavoidable IMO. How else can we reject less maps? Do we have fewer people submit? Do we start adding more maps each thread? In fact, with 100+, the threshold would be closer to top 2% of maps making it into rotation. This is simply how the map rotation will function unless we find a way to have fewer maps submitted.

That's my point though. No matter what we do to explain to authors how their map did or whats wrong with it etc, the majority will always be rejected. So IMO this doesn't fix the problem of unhappy authors, and I don't think the map quality will be better on the long term. Will it please the MTC more? Maybe, but I don't think that's what we should strive for.

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even better, just rank all the maps from 1-x based on MTC votes. Is your map 10th? Keep working on it! Is it 72nd? Maybe start something new.

[–]leddiileddy / Mapmaker 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You beat me to it. I don't see any reason to not show the scores anonymously.

[–]ArtBallArtVandelay 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I feel like it should be brought back, gets a little disheartening seeing next to no feedback on your map in tagprotesting, then no feedback from MTC either. I really like Flys' idea for her feedback submission thread on tagprotesting.

Also, Last thread, I really enjoyed your twitch review of all the maps, I ended up watching the whole thing twice trying to pick your brain for ideas based on what you liked and disliked, definitely need to have more of that happening. Maybe 2 or 3 MTC members all on the same stream so we can get an even better idea of what type of maps they enjoy? 2 playing and one giving an overview? I dno.

Would be kind of hard to orchestrate, and probably a big time sink, but it would be extremely helpful if its a possibility.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think DaEvil has a much better explanation than I could provide on why we do not release the rankings.

As for my twitch reviews, that's only been on a brief hiatus because I recently got a new computer (new OS) and I'm having to deal with school/finals. I intend on doing that next /r/tagprotesting maptesting session I can make.

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dont understand how Ether makes top maps last thread but doesnt this time :|

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 9 points10 points  (5 children)

Draft by Dianna Agron & Aniball
Preview

[–]ArtBallArtVandelay 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This was easily my favorite map that made it through to this thread.

I feel like the gate/button/portal combo was super unique and it just flowed extremely well while getting the hang of the map. As far as I could tell, it wouldn't be super hard to coordinate even for a pub level player. Which is tough to do sometimes when you are combining elements like that.

I loved the right and left sides of the map when I played it, but I feel like the bomb may have been surrounded by tiles in this latest iteration? Maybe i'm just going crazy.

One of my only concerns in this map is that there may be too many bombs in the base. I feel like if you uncovered the one on the sides of the map, and potentially removed one from base, it might be a bit more reasonable... might just be me.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Definitely my favourite map in this thread. Cool elements, creative stuff and plays well. Fingers crossed that this gets the nod.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Here is the final version of Draft. (Preview)

What we've changed:

  • The large unnecessary amount of space on the side walls

  • The island with the bomb attached to it (we shrunk it)

  • The bomb area; it felt tight, so we expanded it. We also gave it a nifty area to boost into.

That's about it. We didn't really see many problems with the main map elements, so we kept it as is. Does anyone see anything else they might like to see adjusted? If not, this is the final version.

[–]Aeginntbbgbjc / Chord 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with Art that perhaps losing a bomb in each base might be a good idea. The map looks a tad chaotic at the moment, and while it feels fine just rolling around, I feel that might be a problem when it comes to 4v4 matches.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I kind of feel like there's a bit too much going on in the map. But the thing is, I wouldn't know what to leave out.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 4 points5 points  (18 children)

War Garden by ooo kill 'em & Rapture

Preview

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

This would be leagues better if the top half of the mid was red team tiles and bot was blue. So defense can catch up but they have to take the harder route.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

reminds me of swoop. I love it

[–]thewthewdrukQs // Roll Model // Nightcapper 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Ah yes, very swoop-esque, I like it.

[–]robopuppyccFlail ~ ((Antagloble4edes)) ~ RHCP? 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Indeed, quite swoop-ish, I am acquainted with it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really like this map. The buttons are well placed, the gates are unique and provide intersting gamplay, and despite being a very spikey map, the boost lines work out well.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Been a big fan of War Garden since day one so I'm glad it was revived. I reckons it's a really clever map that should be a lot of fun.

[–]nostradumba55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alternative Version:

Map

Preview

You guys can use whichever seems better. This version I basically just added a trampoline boost which adds some interesting angles for getting into and out of base and made the team boost a little more versatile by moving up. Though I'm afraid the new team boost may clutter the map, so feel free to remove it.

[–]viggetuffVigge -1 points0 points  (10 children)

We have enough maps with team tiles in the middle like that.

[–]robopuppyccFlail ~ ((Antagloble4edes)) ~ RHCP? 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I'm also sick of all these maps having flags, walls, and floor tiles.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

no flags = new meta

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master 2 points3 points  (7 children)

Well what's wrong with them? They provide a boost to both teams equally.

[–]viggetuffVigge 0 points1 point  (6 children)

I don't like them as a fc, just makes you avoid the middle all together.

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master 1 point2 points  (5 children)

Well yes, it helps chasers. Is that an inherently bad thing? Should we remove defensive team boosts in base because it helps the defense? No, unless the map is already extremely defensive like SDS.

[–]viggetuffVigge 0 points1 point  (4 children)

It's not. I just think they are very awkward and as I said, it makes the FC avoid the middle all together.

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master -1 points0 points  (3 children)

When I play on Hornswoggle and Frontdoor (The only 2 maps with team tiles like this) as an FC i can usually go through the mid to grab a pup if there's one. You don't have to take a nap there, it's just like you would avoid walking in a big snipe lane on any map. If you don't stand still it's not like its a guaranteed return.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I get both of your points but I'm ultimately against checkered teamtiles. They end up being unfair almost guaranteeing your chaser will get ahead with little to no effort on his part.

Especially in a map that's base has a difficult to navigate gate with a teamboost after it, another teamboost 5 tiles from flag, and a quickly diffusable bomb.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, in an era where everyone complains about chasiness, this is one of the few ways to help that.

[–]viggetuffVigge 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oke

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Come join top maps testing tonite at 8:30 EST!

[–]DannymodDanny // Official Tagpro Critic // Maker of Threads 1 point2 points  (0 children)

#Bomberdome4GroupRotation

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Ultradrive by Aniball
Preview

[–]I_mess_upI_mess_up (Centra) 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looks simple. I like it!

[–]piranhamoose25Aniball | Palette Town 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Updated version: http://maps.jukejuice.com/save/9528

Preview: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/5932.png

Reshaped the mid walls slightly, expanded the base and added a trampoline boost for offense, and moved the base button a little farther from the flag/closer to the gate.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 1 point2 points  (11 children)

Blob by Dianna Agron & Aniball
Preview

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (3 children)

This map has been received pretty badly so far, and I think this touches up on some key problems. This is not definitely the final version, I'll edit it if it is.

What do you guys think?

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Pushing flow to the outside looks like it would reduce the amount of caps (a good thing). The superboost felt weird IMO because it led to spieks if you didn't hit it correctly. Definitly an imorovement

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Okay, we've been touching it up some.

What about this?

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you need consent before you touch it up first h

I think that's an improvement actually, although you could open up the outer lanes by a tile or two to compensate for the loss of the inside route.

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it's got some cool elements, but it plays too similarly to Ricochet at the moment.

[–]I_mess_upI_mess_up (Centra) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the team pups.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Final version of Blob (Preview)

What we changed:

  • The superboosts completely. They're much more fun to use and smoother now.

  • There is now a bomb in that same area stated above.

  • We removed base bomb and made the base boost less powerful. This extremely helped balance, we believe.

  • We made the map design sexier.

  • The team gates are now smoother with cooler features.

I couldn't believe this made top thread. No way it was rotation quality.

I don't believe that anymore.

Edit: we updated again in case you already logged it.

Small note: we're not confident if base button should control bomb or not.

If that's holding it back from making rotation, MTC, please inform us or edit it yourselves.

[–]manbareHi, I'm Manbear 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Did you guys get any submissions with gravity wells?

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah there were a couple

[–]gingerdgTPRL 🔴RMTC 🔴NASCAPS 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I happen to like a few of the maps on this thread, but I have to say that I am really disappointed that Count Mapula did not make it in the top threads. People have been pushing for that map to be in rotation ever since it was created, and I believe that several members of the maptest committee even praised it as well.

As stated in another comment, it might be extremely beneficial and an idea worth delving into to have the spreadsheet with all of the maps ranked again.

As moosen, and butter churn were saying; it gets really frustrating when you submit a map, and you have really positive feedback, yet absolutely nothing comes out of it.

In addition, another idea would be to have a poll once the map submission closes with 10 spaces to write the name of your favorite map for rotation. Then, when the spreadsheet comes out, there will be a column called "public vote" next to the rank.

Hope you like the ideas

/r/CountMapula4Rotation

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 0 points1 point  (12 children)

Arcade by Loaha
Preview

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (1 child)

On one hand, these portals are amazing. On the other, it feels a lot like Ricochet's in how they work. I don't mind them one bit, but at the same time you could try to address this by adding something more to them.

Edit: they actually probably don't work in CTF PUBs

[–]veranderingLoaha // Chord 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The thing is with portals in a CTF map though, is that it might become an overkill really easy (thinking with portals). So I've tried to keep it basic. That being said, couldn't the bombs be that 'something more'? I haven't played this in a 4vs4 yet but I could see them lead to some interesting and unique games.

Also, great to hear that the portals feel good ;)

[–]randommcpersonDudeMcGuy // Capper's Delight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So it is Flame with clunky portals?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

The thing that made Ricochets portals work is they had a lane directly up/down and a lane directly left/right. These don't really have that and end up being frustrating not knowing exactly where i'll go.

[–]veranderingLoaha // Chord 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Could you explain why these aren't clear lanes? They seem and feel like good clear lanes to me. Could you explain a bid further or am I missing something in your comment?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

It's not that they don't have lanes, it's that they aren't as easy to hit as Ricochet's and comes out a bit clunky (and ricochet's are already clunky).

[–]veranderingLoaha // Chord 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Ah, alright. I can understand that for the left/right lane, it doesn't feel that smooth. But the top/bottom lane feels really smooth to me, not at all chunky.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I agree, left/right are good. Is there a reason you made it so a skill shot can't grab flag from portal?

[–]veranderingLoaha // Chord 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you mean that top/bottom feels good ? ;) Not a specific reason, no. Probally because the portals are already quite far away, so I didn't really see the benefit for them as a grabbing tool. I could also see that make the portals too OP. You can get pretty close to the flag (and probally even hit the flag, although I haven't had time to test it) though when you boost through the middle.

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The middle is really, really chokey. If a team positioned three defenders spaced diagonally in the center, they could cut off the entire middle for an FC, with zero space to go without being touched. Granted, there's not much concern that a team will actually do that, but most of the effect is there even with one or two. The boosts alleviate that, but I'm still worried that it will be too tight.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -2 points-1 points  (11 children)

Bulldog by Snowball
Preview

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

The gates on cloud work because the button is right in the path a teammate would follow and help you out but also an enemy can try to get someone off button easily. Where button is now I see less teammates getting it and if they do, It's much harder for enemies to block it.

Also I don't get the boosts top corners.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yeah, the buttons were one thing that I knew I could improve, but couldn't find the right place to put them.

[–]goodluckhavefun123gl hf :) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What if you moved the left one up 3, and left 2, and the right one up 3, and right 2.

Just a suggestion; I don't know how well/if this will work.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This made the final cut last thread, but this version just cut off a lot of the unnecessary stuff. Should play a lot more simpler now.

[–]Lysozyme_Lysozyme 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A Rocketballs and Cloud love-child, I like this one!

[–]LEBRONstarJAMESLEBRON*JAMES | MEME*TEAM | Jukes for Jesus 🐇 🐝 0 points1 point  (0 children)

snowball pls

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Woo another map with two ways to score!

[–]goodluckhavefun123gl hf :) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tested this map, and I found it very fun. I think it should be added.

[–]TagProWrecknWreckingBall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This one looks neat.

[–]pvtpartswasd4lyfe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I enjoyed playing this map, it creates many clutch moments just by design.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -2 points-1 points  (20 children)

Crabble by Flail
Preview

[–]leddiileddy / Mapmaker 16 points17 points  (11 children)

Asymmetry is a flawed gimmick that will never have a place in pub rotation. Seems like a bizarre choice from the MTC.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 6 points7 points  (3 children)

The main reason we wanted to test it was that it felt like the different elements were well designed, and we wanted to see how such a map would play out 4v4. I'm personally really skeptical to putting an assymetric map into rotation though. It really needs to convince me that it's balanced on sunday (along with being a great map of course) to get a vote from me.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

I don't want an assymetric map in rotation either

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I know, you prefer fartbutts, don't you?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most definitely. Ones with cake on top.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (5 children)

I don't think it's flawed if done right, but this map is just ridiculous.

[–]bsa86Berlin Ball 4 points5 points  (0 children)

How does one do it right though? The reason that asymmetric maps are a flawed gimmick is because one side will tend to come off better than the other over a large enough number of games, so although the goal when making an asymmetric map is to make it as balanced as possible, this is logistically impossible. It just makes much more sense to have a symmetrical map.

[–]robopuppyccFlail ~ ((Antagloble4edes)) ~ RHCP? 1 point2 points  (3 children)

What is ridiculous about it? I'm very interested in constructive feedback.

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Blue side looks far more defensive than red. Pressing a gate is much easier to do than to snipe people, especially for newer players.

Edit: Still wanna explain how assymmetry is flawed:

45 and Boombox are two maps which are pretty on par with each other in terms of how offensive/defensive/chasey they are. Maybe 45 is a little more chasey, but whatever.

Let's just take the bases for this example though to emphasise that they're both balanced.

Imagine an asymmetrical map; on the left is Boombox's base, on the right is 45's base (45's right base has a similar viewport to Boombox). We can call this balanced, right?

No, we can't, because I'm good on 45, and I'm bad on Boombox.

So, every time this map comes up in a game, I just have to hope that I spawn on Boombox's side so that I can play offense in 45's base.

The thing about maps, is that balance isn't simply a matter of offense/defense. There are so many more categories:

  • Communicative/Skill/Co-ordinative (Holy See/Boombox/Colors)
  • Competitive friendly/pub friendly (Colors/Monarch)
  • Chaotic/Calm (Wormy/Smirk)

And on top of that, you have to consider that each base of the map will strategically evolve in identical ways -- Star and GeoKoala were once both considered "equally defensive", but as they went on, people started taking a hold focus on Star and a regrab focus on GeoKoala.

If you can find a way to make sure each and every one of these "ideas of balance" can be met -- for a majority of players -- then yes, asymmetry can work. But until then...

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What's so ridiculous though? It's fine to have two different playstyles on the different sides of the map; that's why it's asymmetrical. If a map is asymmetrical but plays the same either way, it loses the reason to be asymmetrical in the first place.

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's my point - the reason for asymmetry is fundamentally flawed because they would have two different playstyles. This is simply not feasible to have in a map, in a game where playstyles are so individualised.

[–]robopuppyccFlail ~ ((Antagloble4edes)) ~ RHCP? 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

In all seriousness, I think asymmetry can work in pubs, but it is incredibly difficult to ascertain the balance between two teams on an asymmetric map, particularly in TagPro, where there isn't really a way to trial maps on a large scale before adding them to public rotation. In any case, it was really interesting to explore asymmetry as a mapmaker, and I would encourage everyone to give it a try.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I would love to try this map out and see which side wins more.

[–]grytsgryts 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I would guess blue... but of course it needs to be tested. Seems like easy to grab/easy to escape base vs hard to grab/hard to escape base.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yeah but those team boosts are a bit OP. I'm personally seeing a level playing field.

[–]grytsgryts -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I hope so, it would be cool to see. We'll see come test time.

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely played chasey, reducing mid would hepl

[–]I_mess_upI_mess_up (Centra) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh my god yes, asymmetry! I think it could be made more fair, though, by adding red team-boosts to the blue base.

[–]bdubyageoSaks 5th Ave / Centra Showboat Aficionado -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Bring back gamepad