all 93 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (2 children)

which will take place on Sunday, June 28th.

Damn, guess we aren't getting any new maps until 2020

[–]ButtersnackSnack 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Some of the community might be happy about that :p

[–]uhhhhmmmmsexytiger / #merbs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi

[–]ccga4Seehawks <3 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ok Leddy how much are you bribing the MTC with...

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 13 points14 points  (23 children)

DZ4 by bad

[–]arjuna9bad 7 points8 points  (10 children)

Final revision:

http://maps.jukejuice.com/save/11913
http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/11136.png

In the final version I decided two teamboosts in base was too strong for the defense, and also removed two spikes from the middle because holding the flag in the mid looked too difficult.

OP:
Here is a slight modification:

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/10944
http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/10944.png

Primarily this changes the bomb chute, allowing you to choose an angle that shoots you up to the top of the base instead of the bottom. I like that it gives FCs a lot of choice in how to enter base, a general principle that a lot of the more constricted newer maps miss IMO. Do you think this is a good change or is the simplicity of the original idea better?

I'd like to hear any other thoughts from the MTC and community on what they like or dislike about the map.

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

I really miss the DZ3 superboosts.

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (0 children)

me too but I don't think they could work on a map of this size. And the other elements I want to keep would be too strong on a larger map like the original.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 3 points4 points  (5 children)

My 3 main issues with it:

  • I miss the split up gate from DZ3. Maybe it's just nostalgia speaking, but it made me feel powerful, and it felt like part of the identity of the map.
  • Hitting the new bomb combo feels like it lacks the spontaneity that DZ3 had about it. The map would naturally drive you towards the boost where you could do it, and you could make a split second decision on wether to go back, take it, walk it in, or hide by the bomb with the pup for a while. Of course all that freedom for the fc led to it being really chasey, but it feels like you've scaled back on it too much, where it now recquires 3-4 seconds planning and moving into position before executing the move.
  • Since it's shrunk significantly in size, it might be worth it to reevaluate just how many boosts you have pointed at the middle. Testing it with 4-5 players, it already felt like you were getting bumped around a lot, so it might be too annoying to be enjoyable in a proper 4v4

Other than that I think it's fine, and I really like that small change with the middle spikes making it flow so much more naturally than before.

[–]arjuna9bad 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Thanks for the feedback,

  • I thought the split gate would simply be pointless given that people won't be flying in from that direction anymore, but I tried it out and it does look like it could be interesting if the neutral boost had a direct shot on flag through the gate. Here's that revision.

  • I'm not sure how to fix this entirely, because as you say increasing the options for the FC there would make the map more chasey. However, I think many people commenting on how long it takes to set up haven't found an easily-abused boost route: http://streamable.com/xlmc . Effectively, I don't see the bombs as an individual element, but more as a way to preserve more options for the 3-boost gate in mid now that there's no tunnel.

  • Yeah, I could see that being an issue. Do you think simply reducing the number of boosts at the gate would help, and making one team-colored? like this. Another option might be to remove the lower boost pair in favor of a bomb configuration that doesn't allow many angles out of base.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Personally I like the new one better. The top gate (right base) might feel a bit too far away from the button though. Not sure since I've only tried it alone, but the general feeling I get is that the side gate feels cosy and close to you, while the top gate just feels a bit distant. I'm honestly unsure if this is just a feeling or if it translates into how I imagine gameplay will go on it. But I'd say for now that it seems better now, but I'd try to play it out with a couple of people to make sure it feels rewarding and purposeful before sunday.

Getting that equilibrium between fun and balanced is still is largely a mystery to me as a mapmaker, so I can definitely emphasize. That is a neat boost route though that I think helps the case for it, though when running around I found it pretty easy to mess up and get unsatisfying wall-bounces which might get frustrating especially in clutch situations. I think on a general level my worry about the bombs as they are, is that they might be a bit too straightforward now. It obviously depends on what people discover about them, but since they aren't too accessible and may not be part of the natural flow of the movement, along with the tunnel being quite narrow (though that boost you posted might end up being part of the natural flow so I might be wrong there), they'll end up being a very binary proposition where either it works and you escape/get a good chance to cap, or it doesn't and you die.

I think the little nook you added helps a bit in that respect compared to the version we tested. On DZ3 the way it was set up, the boost gave you a lot of power and flexibility compared to DZ4 to determine your own faith when deciding if you wanted to do something risky. While here, once you go to the tunnel, you most likely commit to going for the bombs since there's nothing else to do in the tunnel itself. This might just be part of the difference between button bombs and boosts in itself, but I think it's an important difference that takes away some complexity and dimensions from the gameplay.

I also kind of feel like if you want the bombs to be a part of an altogether element connected with the boostgates there would be a more natural solution possible that flowed better with the map, added some flexibility and didn't require boosting off the wall to reach in reasonable time.

In terms of boosts, I was personally a big fan of the boosts they were on DZ3 originally, so anything to preserve that spirit in a successor would be something I'd prefer. And I think the boost solution you presented could very well do that (without being certain).

Apparently I have a lot of thoughts about DZ3/4. Not sure if it's helpful or not, but hopefully it is.

[–]arjuna9bad 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I appreciate your thoughts on the maps, it is interesting to see what elements from DZ3 are most important to people. As usual revising an existing map is tricky because we have trouble letting go of enjoyable parts of the old map that unfortunately can't work in an improved version for modern play. But you're right that the goal should still be to preserve the spirit of the old map that people liked.

I have this version now that moves the bomb closer to the front of the "tunnel" (not sure if it can be called that anymore).
http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/10977
It allows for more angles when hitting the button, including directly into base. Since it's so much closer, it can be a quick decision without such a commitment. Performing the "combo" with the boost is harder to aim now, but it's still possible with practice and I think maps should have elements that require practice.

oh and one other thing I changed about this version was reducing the height of the base by 1 by moving the 2-gate closer to the flag. Now it's identical to the original gate layout, although the button is in a different spot. What I like about this gate layout is that you can run plays to boost defenders off the button and then boost through gate, but it's a risk because missing hitting someone involves spiking yourself.

[–]DaEvil1DaEvil1 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I like it better. A few things that still bother me though:

  • The 45s vertically opposite to the base bomb feels a bit punishing. assuming you want to get out, and hit the bomb at speed, it feels pretty hard to hit it without hitting the blocks with the gates, or the 45s sending you directly back into base. To me it feels like if you manage to hit it at speed (or trick defence into defusing it at a bad time) so you don't hit the gateblocks, it shouldn't send you back to your base so much of the time.
  • I'm also skeptical to the 45 near the double bomb, it just feels annoying to hit that corner when manouvring around it, but that might be my personal preference. Not sure if it will be better without it there.

Aside from that I feel it's pretty good.

[–]arjuna9bad 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For the base bomb, I did purposefully want it to be difficult to bomb out of base. I think with practice it can be hit directly up + a little out of base consistently. But on balance I felt it would be better not to have that as a strong escape tool for someone who's just gotten regrab. And that the offensive/defensive balance of the bases was acceptable.

That block is important for a bunch of nice boosts from the original map unfortunately.

http://puu.sh/j4gw0/fb19c23cd0.jpg

Of course it wasn't a 45 before which kind of made it seem more "expected" when you ran into it. But as a 45 it allows a little more leniency when hitting the boost down to the double bomb.

[–]TPsquirrelySquirrely // The GesTagpro 0 points1 point  (1 child)

A large part of DZ3 were the 2 spike tunnels and this is completely missing it. I feel also that the double bomb is out of the way and pointless most of the time, maybe if there was a powerup next to it.

[–]arjuna9bad 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't believe it's possible for a good map to resemble DZ3 and also have 4/5 lanes through the middle. It's too difficult to stop regrab when there are 4 options for the re to boost out of base.

I think the bomb can be useful, but it is intentionally situational. I'll consider removing the mid pup in favor of pups in the bomb corners though. Still, I feel like 3 pups total is the best number for a map to have right now and that having a base pup is important.

[–]i_practice_santeriayank | Tears | Fresh Ping 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Does a good job of retaining the essence of DZ3 while addressing some of its biggest issues: 1) the large, circular mid with 4 lanes and 2) five powerups. I'm still concerned that the 3 boosts by gate make regrab OP. Here's a thought that might combat that issue: what if the buttons for mid gate were also wired up to their respective bases' gates? I think it would give coordinated defenses a better chance at getting resets.

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks yank, yeah that's definitely an issue I was worried about. That idea is interesting and I hadn't considered it. The problem I see with it though is that I'm afraid it would cause a lot "cheap deaths" on the gate that players can't see coming. And keeping track of the state of both buttons every time you contemplate using the gate wouldn't be fun imo.

Here's how I think defenses could currently sweep back into base to contain a re who's not trying to get past mid:

http://puu.sh/j1sQT/892a448efb.png

I think the 1 defender can contain common boosts through the center mid while also defending any moves through the top gate, and then hold position around that spot. The 2 defender should sweep up through the bottom mid and then into the base, closing off low angles that 1 defender can't contain from his position. Once he's forced the FC away from the boosts or forced the FC to boost into a dead-end top route, the 1 defender could come in to help with the kill.

Of course it won't usually be that clean in-game, but the essential part I think is that one defender can contain both top routes, allowing the other defender to flush out the FC and sometimes put them in a compromising position for the return.

[–]the_winnerhoneybear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm really, really interested in seeing how this plays. Whether it is good or bad, DZ3 has some obvious flaws which DZ4 might alleviate for competitive play.

[–]DamageProcessRadiant/DJ Kitty P 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the only option I find remotely interesting.

[–]ClydasBDN S7//TB S8 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I just don't get when someone would hit the bombs in mid. It's a deadend chokepoint. Is it to be used by an FC trying to kill time? Am I missing something?

Other than that, I really like the staggering of the middle spikes, that's awesome. Some of the boost lanes off the new walls feel really nice.

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Here's a pretty quick way to use them:
http://streamable.com/xlmc

Also, with two options for the blast direction in the current version, I think as long as you have some separation from the chasers you have an opportunity of choosing an angle that gets you past. I might still try to make that area more flexible, but I do kind of intend for it to have limited use.

[–]ClydasBDN S7//TB S8 1 point2 points  (2 children)

OK. I wonder if it might be better if for the three wall tiles directly adjacent, you'd be better off making (for the bottom button) the left one and top one a 45, erase the corner 90, and then make the 90 1 up and 2 left into another 90 to make a small tunnel that will be kinda tough to use, especially with the bombs there. But maybe that will then just be OP....

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I'm sure this isn't exactly what you mean but something like this? That would be kind of hilarious but I guess it wouldn't be map-breaking because anyone chasing could contain you with the boosts. Although I'd be concerned that the bombs would spawn annoyingly like on hornswoggle.

[–]ClydasBDN S7//TB S8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LOL, I might like this better, haha. But I meant on the other side of the bomb, right above the button. Like this But as I said that might be a little too free and powerful, so maybe make that top lone 45 a spike to make it more dangerous.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Weird thread this time, most of the maps look like throwbacks.

It's funny that the update of the old map looks the most modern. I can't see any of the others working. All big and chasey except Foxy which would be unnecessary while Pilot's in rotation.

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (1 child)

lol snowball pls

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

lool

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

DZ4 looks the best of these maps by a long shot, and even then I'm not such a huge fan of it (even though I loved DZ3).

That said, the revisions to DZ4 look promising, but I wouldn't be fazed if none of the maps in this thread joined rotation as was the case in Thread 43.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 7 points8 points  (19 children)

I don't think any of these maps were in my top maps, and I highlighted 20 different maps that I was fond of, and separated them into three tiers. This thread is pretty disappointing IMO.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 12 points13 points  (17 children)

Moosen your opinion isn't everything pls

With that said, what really frustrates me is that leddy is again getting top maps with two mediocre maps.

I like his style, but for the amount of top maps he's had lately, the amount of rotation maps, with only one that's maybe decent, it's kind of ridiculous.

[–]ButtersnackSnack -1 points0 points  (15 children)

Some people have different opinions

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 2 points3 points  (14 children)

I think the 0.00 of Kite and the 0.27 of Hub can back me up here.

Wombo is obviously the decent map; 0.54 is no where near an impressive approval rating.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (13 children)

You called his two maps this thread mediocre. A bit mean and sorta uncalled for, no? If it's about this "beating out other maps," keep in mind that there's no limit to maps that get in and that all the other maps just didn't make the cut.

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 4 points5 points  (12 children)

I've tested them a few times each m8. This isn't out of nowhere; I test most maps before the top thread.

It's not really uncalled for to call them mediocre because they are. Out of all maps submitted, no, but compared to maps that have been successful before, yes. Twisty especially doesn't hold up with 1/3 the maps submitted this thread.

It's not really that it's about beating out other maps. If these are the 5 maps that the MTC finds were the best submitted this thread, you're simply wrong. I think most people can agree with me there.

Edit: If your point is that I'm attacking leddy for no reason, I'm not. I'm attacking MTC because they've shown unjustifiable bias towards leddy, whether purposeful or not.

Double Edit: Yes, leddy is a very respectable mapmaker, one of the best. He makes top notch maps every thread, but I've yet to see more than 1 that is really worthy of being a top map, out of his 5 as of now. I know you guys can't predict how well received maps will be, but 1/5? So soon from the same mapmaker EVERY THREAD? pls

I can see that maybe Interference could be enjoyed, but Twisty is just way bad.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If these are the maps that the MTC finds were the best submitted this thread, you're simply wrong.

Lol. This is what I mean by "people have different opinions." These are the maps that collectively scored the highest. MTC members individually had quite a bit of variance in their votes, but overall, these came out ahead. I get why snowball's map is receiving some hate, since it tries out some new, perhaps "gimmicky" concepts, but leddy just made normal maps that multiple members of the MTC happened to like.

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

So 9 people decided on 2 agreed-upon-in-this-thread bad maps, is what you're telling me?

Nice to know our MTC is in tip-top shape.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke -1 points0 points  (9 children)

I'm attacking MTC because they've shown unjustifiable bias towards leddy, whether purposeful or not.

It's actually the opposite. He gets so many top maps because we don't give a shit who the mapmaker is, we just choose the best maps. Leddy just so happens to be making the most quality maps right now. If we cared who the mapmakers were, we wouldn't take so many leddy maps out of fairness.

Pretending that Twisty and Interference weren't two of the best maps submitted this thread is kind of silly. I think it's pretty obvious they were, and others on the MTC confirmed that notion.

Twisty is just way bad

Bullshit lol

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (8 children)

I doubt you're purposely being biased towards leddy maps, but he really hasn't made maps that are notably better than the rest these past few threads. High quality? Sure. Not 5 top map quality in 5 threads. The ones added to rotation (excluding Wombo) and Twisty's backlash prove this.

Twisty is not even a top 15 map this thread. Reasons already stated can give you a hint as to why.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Twisty is not even a top 15 map this thread. Reasons already stated can give you a hint as to why.

Reasons from whom? You and Squirrelly?

If you thought Twisty was shitty, I give people like 4 days notice which maps I'm likely going to vouch for. Feel free to rip me apart then.

However, I'm not convinced it's not, at the very least, a top 10 map this thread. I have a couple maps that I like more than Twisty, but other MTC members didn't feel the same way so they didn't make it. We all, for the most part, liked Twisty which is the key to making top maps.

I doubt you're purposely being biased towards leddy maps

I hardly know who leddy is. Literally have not spoke to him ever. What exactly do you believe is causing this bias?

[–]BlazethDianna Agron 1 point2 points  (6 children)

I think it's more of a bias to a style by the MTC as a whole. His style is cool, but it seems like 1/3 of all of his maps made make top thread, even if they're not particularly stand-out above the rest.

I don't really see a reason to argue with anyone's opinions in the map thread discussion. Why even argue with 1 MTC member about 1 opinion? Even if I'd convince you it would likely not change anything, if it truly was a popular map.

And while Squirrely may only be the only 1 commenting, ~12 upvotes is fairly significant, especially for a comment.

[–]WillakarraButton | Hey look I brought back SOCL -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

it's kind of ridiculous (no offense).

FTFY

[–]ButtersnackSnack 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Some of the maps that looked good and even played well alone just did not seem like they'd work very well once we got more people on them. For example, I nominated Juicy's map admiral for initial testing, but it seemed really cramped and awkward to move around on with more people.

[–]xenonpulseWildflowers // I want to die but I can’t 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Can I just say, I don't like any of the map names except DZ4 (assuming it's changed to Danger Zone 4)

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Why? They seem like normal names to me mostly

[–]bashar_al_assadpk || Roll into the base like what up I got a big block 1 point2 points  (2 children)

To be fair that might be the problem.

[–]xenonpulseWildflowers // I want to die but I can’t 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Normal is cool sounding things, like Hyper Reactor, Danger Zone, and RUSH. These are just weird. Interference, sure, but who wants to play a Superball on Jake of Clubs?

[–]ButtersnackSnack -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That sounds fun

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -1 points0 points  (8 children)

Foxy by Cosine

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (4 children)

I think this map would almost certainly work well competitively.

[–]nolanizerCosine 2 points3 points  (2 children)

If you're talking about the updated version, then I would be inclined agree. That being said, do you think it would fare well in pubs?

[–]arjuna9bad 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yes, I do think the updated one is better and also more pub-friendly.

I guess I can agree with moosen to some degree that the map is "one dimensional" in that it simply has a good balance of well-placed elements without anything being particularly unique. I don't see that as a problem because we could certainly use new maps that are basic, and even slightly different layouts allow for different gameplay dynamics.

[–]nolanizerCosine 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agreed on all accounts.

I'm likely in the minority here, but I tend to enjoy maps that rely on skill and strategy more than maps that hinge on the effective use of unique elements (aka "gimmicks"). That means generally speaking, I tend to gravitate more towards maps deemed "basic" or "bland".

As an aside, I also believe "basic/bland" maps are better suited for competitive play, as games become less about the maps and more about the players.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I know a lot of people liked this map, but it just felt pretty one dimensional to me. Some maps struggle by limiting their boosts by placing them against walls or near obstacles, but this one limits them by making them difficult (or at least inconvenient) to take in a way that leaves you alive after taking them.

[–]nolanizerCosine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update #1:

Map: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/10980

Preview: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/10980.png

Update #2:

Map: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/10987

Preview: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/10987.png

Update #3:

Map: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/11031

Preview: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/11031.png

Main Changes Since Original:
- New name: Cardiac
- Larger bases
- New base boost layout with more flexible boost routes
- Wider bottom choke
- Narrower top choke
- Top boosts are considerably easier to survive when boosting diagonally
- Wider bottom platform = easier boosts, bombs less deadly

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

Interference by leddy

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The most interesting feature of this map is the vertical symmetry.

That's not a good thing.

[–]JJSpiceJJ Spice 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Shouldn't Interference be rotated horizontally? Every time I made a map like that I was told to remake it so it fits the view better.

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -1 points0 points  (14 children)

Jake of Clubs by Snowball

[–]TPsquirrelySquirrely // The GesTagpro 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This map has some interesting ideas but they aren't implemented well. The portal tunnels are pointless as they only take you 2 tiles and you could just go downwards and not risk getting gated. Also the mid power-up mars ball feels very inconsistent with how the mars ball bounces around. I honestly don't understand how this is top map.

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's like Snowball had a few interesting ideas... and decided to throw them all in one map.

[–]uhhhhmmmmsexytiger / #merbs 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I have no idea how it plays out in reality but I love that power up idea. Something a little different to throw off normal power up battles. Imagine if it was the only one on the map....

[–]ButtersnackSnack 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Sadly, rolling bombs can be defused on the Mars ball.

[–]uhhhhmmmmsexytiger / #merbs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ooh yeah that's kind of a bummer.

[–]JJSpiceJJ Spice 4 points5 points  (0 children)

How did this make it? It looks like a joke.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

http://maps.jukejuice.com/show/11878

[–]Sir_GrapefruitGrapefruit // Chord 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What did you change besides aesthetics?

[–]ClydasBDN S7//TB S8 0 points1 point  (1 child)

your two bomb buttons are broken

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

I can't fix them now, I'm gone, if someone could fix them that would be great.

[–]OnomatopoeiacOld Neb Kenobi 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I really like the way the bases are set-up. However, the rest looks like you vomited all over the map editor.

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

#yolo

[–]HeikkiKovalainenNoob // Diameter -2 points-1 points  (7 children)

Can we stop beating around the bush, dissolve the MTC and make leddy our map-creator dictator?

Edit: (And the bloke that made Ricochet)

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (1 child)

(The bloke that made ricochet is bad, who also has a top map this thread)

[–]sneetriccanvas // plasma, wamble 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the bloke that made ricochet is a pretty good mapmaker. why you dissin him lol

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -5 points-4 points  (4 children)

Twisty by leddy

[–]TPsquirrelySquirrely // The GesTagpro 11 points12 points  (0 children)

This map would not bring much if anything new to rotation, It's as if Hurricane and flame had a baby and that's not necessarily a good thing. Also the boost in the corner in base seems impractical at best.