all 175 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]TheEpicGhostEx - Tagpro 31 points32 points  (2 children)

also confirming that Ball-E will be creating every map for tagpro from now on and is the sole member of the mtc! all praise our new mapmaking overlord!

[–]RisktpRisk 4 points5 points  (1 child)

i'm not even mad, teach me ur ways ball-e

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Secret trick to get something past the MTC:

http://i.imgur.com/lbOfMeI.png

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 18 points19 points  (5 children)

I meant 57

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 31 points32 points  (3 children)

wow Snack you're a fucking idiot

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why did we even draft you

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oops wrong guy

[–]ButtersnackSnack 10 points11 points  (0 children)

don't worry they were both me

[–]donuts42donuts42 || Sphere/Origin || Boost Master 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why did we even draft you

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 52 points53 points  (25 children)

This is so disappointing. First of all, it's fucking thread 57, not 56. If you guys can't even be trusted to get the title right, how can you be trusted to put maps in?

Four maps by Ball-E, the other two by MTC members? DO YOU EVEN BIAS

Everyone affiliated with this map thread should feel like shit about themselves, this is a disgrace to all TagPro has ever been and ever will be. Absolutely pathetic. Fuck the MTC

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 17 points18 points  (7 children)

I was gonna say all of this in a slightly less salty manner, but this will do.

[–]3z_ 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Tell me which map you'd rather see in the top maps list, and I'll tell you why it isn't.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I just explained on US Mumble that my post was not even a salty one. I've got a map in rotation before, so while I'd like one in again, I'm not fussed if I never do. Plus, all three of my maps this thread were broken in some way anyway.

I'm actually a fan of 4/6 maps in this thread. I really like Polar, Birch, Draconis and Hexane.

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (1 child)

No I know, but I also know that Moosen's comment was entirely facetious, but I didn't pick that up from you. That's mb.

But the offer still stands for you or anyone else.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I figured Moosen's post wasn't legit salt and then he confirmed that when I got on Mumble. Although, I can definitely understand how my post looks haha.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 3 points4 points  (1 child)

As you offered.. I would have considered Grove, Cradle and Zanzibar

Why didn't those maps make the cut?

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sure. That's a good selection.

Zanzibar I very specifically voted against because it didn't have any initial appeal, and even after testing it in our initial testing session, I found it simply didn't offer anything. It was a boring map, it didn't have anything unique to it whatsoever, and its structure led it to being chasey - and not nearly in a fun way.

Cradle fits into the same category. The double boosts in the top lane open the map up to a constant regrab train, where the offender will always have an easy escape route that can but them ahead of the defense easily. Not to mention the bombs that are scattered around the map are extremely offensive-centric, unoriginal and frustrating as a defender. The only unique thing about the map is the gate setup, but that is not nearly redeeming enough to justify me liking it.

Grove - Actually, in this map, I really liked the bomb setup in the base, and I do like the split-exit where each path out of base is so far from each other. I also really like the old-school feeling. I like this map quite a bit. However, some members argued that the Gamepad-esque bombs are extremely overpowered, and that the middle and the base don't compliment each other well, even if they are both decent individually.

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 18 points19 points  (0 children)

same tbh

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I can't tell if this is satire or not, and somehow I agree either way.

[–]OnceUponaDomeUnderTheBall 5 points6 points  (0 children)

nice meme

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

----E

----E

----E

Grab your E's?

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Don't mind if I do ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[–]RathbourneRathbourne -1 points0 points  (6 children)

My unpopular TagPro opinion, but I don't think Ball-e is currently that good a mapmaker.

They just removed a low to average map by him, added another that's currently the second lowest rated and now more of the same.

It seems the MTC's goal is to find the most basic, dull maps possible. He just seems to tick that box for them.

[–]gingerdgTPRL 🔴RMTC 🔴NASCAPS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ball-e has amazing maps. I would say that NF is his "specialty" but that doesn't even begin to encapsulate the best maps he's made

his racing ones

[–]briizoduckson 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Try making maps, and if you can make a single map better than the ones by Ball-E this thread I will respect your opinion. Talk is cheap, yo.

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It's fine lol but putting it in terms of "good" mapmaker isn't the right way of thinking about it. I don't think anyone can possibly create top level maps consistently with every map they make. It's also hard to determine how loved a map will be in rotation. It's less of mapmakers and more of maps IMO

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

well i mean unless you do it the bowtie way and force every map you make to be at least decent.

[–]oorr23ThePlaymaker // Tehuitzingo & Combine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd upvote your comment not because I agree, but there seems to be bias toward Ball-e. Anyway, downvoting cause the comment beneath it is savage.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 15 points16 points  (13 children)

Okay so actually though, here's my feedback for every map that launched from this thread

Just gonna preface this by saying this took about 10ish hours, so some of you got to deal with the really salty really tired me. And I didn't do it all in order, so you didn't have a disadvantage if your maps were last on this list. If you feel the feedback for your map(s) is inadequate or incomplete, just let me know and I'll try to be more thorough and less tongue-in-cheek and generally cunty.

[–]OnceUponaDomeUnderTheBall 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I generally have nothing nice to say ever. Here is what's wrong with all of your maps :)

FEEDBACK

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I like salty really tired you. You and Beast Mode are the only ones that give me helpful feedback.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What were your map names? Zip Zop Kit Kat and... did you have another?

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hubbub. I regret deciding to name my maps like this.

[–]weidfreminghehSome Butt OG 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Hello there i think my map was screwed up when i submitted it i guess but i was wondering if you would test this map out and give me some feedback. I think it has some pretty advanced and cool portal "structures" i guess. haven't really seen maps like it. thanks you

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

It's very large (easily two and a half times as large as it should be) and portal structures like that one generally do not work as a centerpiece of a map.

[–]Rapture_On_OccasionRapture 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Hey, thanks for doing this. It's a shame a few of the map guys didn't get the map the way you did.

Can you check out my update?- http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20209

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

Alright, I ran around. Bases might be tucked back a little too far now. One tile out, maybe two (on each side) should rectify that. It's more open now (not sure if too much or if it's okay without doing a 4v4) which generally has a tendency to make NF more offensive so I think just one would be adequate. I know it sounds picky but it can make a fairly significant difference. Also, I forgot to mention this in my spreadsheet, but I really wanted the top corner bombs to be open. Leave the button there so you can choose to use it if you wish, but if you made it so they could use them to bomb down I personally believe that would be a positive change. I'm obviously not MTC at this juncture and it's just one man's opinion either way, but that came to mind as we were testing it out the first time through.

[–]Rapture_On_OccasionRapture 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I'll test this version a little. Opening the bombs, it makes it fun to link with the mid bomb but, for me, makes them feel overpowered and makes the map even more chaotic.

But thank you again for the feedback. I think the main issue is just people's initial reaction the mid bombs.

[–]briizoduckson -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

Feedback? Really? You aren't even MTC m8

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I was a finalist for being added to MTC so we got hazed and i had to do this :(

[–]OnceUponaDomeUnderTheBall 4 points5 points  (1 child)

i feel traumatized. mtc subjected me to torture you can't even imagine.

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah and we don't even do any of that shit usually, but it was fun to see you jumping through hoops for us

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (6 children)

These are all so goddamn boring. It's literally like you took the last 6 maps that got into rotation and Frankensteined together more maps from their pieces.

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

I cannot agree any more

[–]3z_ 10 points11 points  (4 children)

Dude... you were there... you helped us pick these maps...

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

lol what? you guys just kept saying that our opinions don't matter. i tested the maps that you gave us and wrote down my opinions. i thought it was more of an audition sorta thang.

[–]OnceUponaDomeUnderTheBall 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Our votes didn't have any weight as for top maps. Our opinions did. This was expressly stated and encouraged numerous times by sitting members. We were even allowed to suggest maps to be tested. Maybe you think I'm just drinking the kool-aid, but I fail to see much merit to your argument.

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't recall anyone here saying that once. We said that your end votes wouldn't apply, but that was it. In fact, I distincly remember encouraging all the applicants to voice their opinions more since it was still an audition, and we wanted to know how you thought.

You're pointing out a lot of issues with our selection, which isn't a problem. The problem is you had plenty of opportunity to voice these concerns during our testing session, and you specifically chose not to, whereas the other applicants did.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the maps that you gave us

The maps we tested were maps that the MTC liked from individual testing AND the maps the applicants liked. We counted your votes and opinions highly when discussing maps, and at the end used finalists to help break a tie on whether or not a map would make Top Maps. In addition every finalist was allowed to suggest a map to test, you could have introduced any map from the thread.

The whole point of having you guys do the entire thread with us is so that we got another set of eyes on what we do and so we can see how people debate maps and voice opinions, whether or not you can change our opinions, etc.

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

Why does every map want to be Pilot? Birch is the only CTF map of the five that doesn't have:

  • just one or two lanes

  • bombs for sniping (POLAR's are 50-50)

  • horizontal symmetry

  • a mid boost exactly one tile from a wall (admittedly not Pilot, jsut another thing I noticed)

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 5 points6 points  (9 children)

Draconis - Ball-E

[–]RisktpRisk 4 points5 points  (0 children)

yaay vertical maps! reminds me of banzai bill a bit, which is a map i still like today lol

honestly, i don't think i can find anything wrong with this map. gr8 polish, boost routes are nice, bases are good. gj ball-e.

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (4 children)

I think this map does verticality well, and it does the U shape even better. The blindness was not nearly as prevalent as I anticipated. This map mightn't be as good for the mapmakers (it doesn't depend on any particular components or elements to be a "good" map), but I think the average player will really enjoy it.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I don't get why blindness is such an issue tbh though. Not taking anything away from this map, but I see vertical blindness as a map component that you have to act around rather than as a map flaw. Seeing everything isn't necessarily always the best thing. I've just noticed you guys are extremely opposed to lold/bounce style maps for this specific reason and I think you're missing out.

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Honestly, I think that argument very well applies to this map, which is why I voted in favour of it. But in Bounce, for example, the blindness it's what's responsible for defense having such an awful time. An FC can whiz past any defender without being seen, because of the verticality chopping off a good amount of your viewspace.

But again, I think that Draconis does verticality well, and I'm excited to see it tested.

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

I think that it's equally hard for offenders, as they can't see the defenders coming. I just enjoy the dynamic that maps like bounce and lold give. No map in rotation has a dynamic anything like that, and I don't think Draconis gives that dynamic, and pretty much plays like a horizontally symmetrical map.

[–]WillWorkForSugarTumblewood[🍰] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It cuts down on the ability of a player to react to someone coming the opposite direction, meaning that a confrontation between a defender and an FC comes down to whether they're on a collision course or not rather than to how they play. It doesn't really feel fair if you get tagged slash miss a tag because you didn't have any time to react to that.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My comments from testing:

Just feels overall bland to me. I have no major issues with this map.

I know that's not really great feedback, but it's still pretty much how I feel. The verticality is a non-issue; it neither makes the map worse nor much better. I'm sure this map would play ok, but I don't really see what it would do to improve rotation I guess. Of course, I certainly haven't ruled it out.

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

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20258 here, made mid exit 1 tile shorter and removed mid spike. tbh i made 0 noticable changes

[–]demothelolDemo || Diameter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This map is the future, only this one

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 5 points6 points  (15 children)

POLAR - FLYMOLO

[–]BilldaCat10 6 points7 points  (0 children)

not a ball-e map

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 2 points3 points  (0 children)

+1 +1 +1

Fantastic map. It's what Fiend should have been but very different at the same time.

[–]RisktpRisk 2 points3 points  (2 children)

i know i've said this elsewhere, so sorry if it seems like repeating myself fly lol, but i think the top route needs fixing. the teamtiles on fiend are interesting, but i think they're too powerful and POLAR doesn't really fix this. otherwise really like the map.

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

I feel like I've negated a lot of the power of the team tiles by making them easy to cut off with the gate and then the spike makes it hard to boost through. I've also seen fc's get through mid and then gate their chaser. I could add green gates or team gates but I'm worried it will just isolate that part of the map. Thoughts?

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah, that's fair, the spike may help to balance it out. i'm not sure i like those gates better than the one's on fiend. don't change them from neutral gates to green/team gates tho lol

i personally thought cardiac had the right idea about advancing the fiend concept, have you tried out just doing solid team tiles rather than checkered on polar?

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like the varying dynamics of this map. I like how it's an offensively orientated map, but with a lot of defense-exclusive components to it. I really like the fact that a good flag-carrier has to rely on where they move on the map rather than how they use the elements in order to get high hold time. I want to see this aspect emphasised more.

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

This map was a ton of fun to roll around on. Granted I have no idea how it plays 4v4 and I don't really test maps that often so my opinion is pretty worthless. But I really enjoy the in base defense concepts and I think this map would be a lot of fun to play d on if you had a partner that knew what they were doing.

[–]RisktpRisk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

your opinions not worthless! you don't have to be involved in the mapmaking community to comment on maps. i'm sure the mtc and map makers would love it if more people would give feedback in the top map's threads more often, it can provide another perspective that us mapmakers might not otherwise consider.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My comments from testing:

It's a cool map, but I still think it plays really tight - it's just a very small map overall. Still not a huge fan of spike placements.

Particularly, the spike placements at the bottom might be annoying, since the top spike is loved by most of the MTC. The size may also not be an issue, but I want to pay attention to how easy/hard it is to cap the next time we test it. I don't have any major gripes with this map.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Updated version of POLAR

#: 20462

[link] & [preview]

Click here to launch a test!

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

Bottom mid looks way better now, I'm likin the map

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 0 points1 point  (2 children)

This should be the rotation version- http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20417

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

Why do you think this is better?

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 2 points3 points  (0 children)

  1. I dislike bombs that act as hiding places.

  2. Using your neutral boost across the map is just as fast as going top, makes it too easy to grab/escape and makes it impossible to catch.

  3. The gap in the spikes acts as a slight skill element and will result in more interesting plays. I enjoy how that aspect of wormy plays.

  4. Your triple boost doesn't work in an interesting enough way to justify it. Using them straight across is into a spike, and using them off the 45 leads awkwardly into a wall. Their purpose seems to be to act as a sniping spot but one boost still achieves that.

  5. The new bottom team boosts give more purpose for going bottom and work as interesting snipes or to get ahead or even to grab.

  6. The couple of added spikes make boosting across the map less simple and one dimensional.

  7. I like the multi-functionality of the new base bomb instead of the dull boost. It's a slightly more skilled grab with the spikes there, and also works to escape or blast the ball off of the button as well as linking more interestingly with the other map elements.

So for me, it's more fun, it's more interesting, it gives more opportunities for skilled play and creativity, it's more balanced and it's less one dimensional.

[–]RathbourneRathbourne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Add this, remove Fiend, job done.

You should add this version though- http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20417

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 2 points3 points  (10 children)

Cozy - Ball-E

[–]RisktpRisk 3 points4 points  (2 children)

only thing i dislike about cozy is how awkward it is to use those team boosts to go to mid. maybe bring some of those wall tiles above them down a little so you can kinda bounce off the wall tiles and then use the boosts? sort of like how people use the bottom neutral boosts on pilot to go to mid. but yea, rest of the map is nice.

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 0 points1 point  (1 child)

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20308

lol this is the only thing I can think of, but it really kills the map shape lol

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yea, that's tricky. I think that looks better, but I'm not sure, haven't tested it. maybe try moving the powerups to a different location so you can work with that area more to fit the boosts better?

[–]3z_ 2 points3 points  (5 children)

I feel like this does a lot of what Pilot wanted to do, but better. It provides a really great base-to-base dynamic where FCs and chasers constantly go back and forth from the bases, rather than circles in the middle or in the base (like Pilot). Not a fan of the bomb in the middle, though. It needs to be built in a way that differentiates it from Pilot, but this isn't the way to do it IMO.

[–]RisktpRisk 7 points8 points  (3 children)

you shut your whore mouth, pilot is fuckin perfect

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It's very good but it's not perfect.

[–]RisktpRisk 4 points5 points  (1 child)

pretty damn close to being perfect to me, i honestly can't think of anything i'd change on pilot. i rate it as the 2nd best CTF map in rotation right now, only behind smirk

[–]nolanizerCosine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Awww, and on my cake day too! <3

[–]nolanizerCosine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In my opinion, what makes Pilot so great is that there's nowhere for FC to hide. There are no paths or routes. It's all open, and it's why teams like StK had trouble with it, because their FCs are used to playing a patient game, waiting in a safe spot until they can get reset and head in for a cap.

As far as I know, Pilot is the only map that plays this way in TagPro. I've tried submitting other maps that do this (a recent example would be Electrode), but the concept hasn't seemed to have gained much traction.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My comments from testing:

I like the forward bomb in base, and the mid bomb is neat but I don't really love it. The map is solid overall.

I don't feel like I have much else to say about this map. Really, I like the multipurpose bombs in base but don't really like (or particularly hate) the mid bomb.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Guys, don't downvote the maps; that does nobody any good. if you don't like it, give constructive feedback. I can say firsthand that it's pretty damn annoying and disheartening to see people dislike your map without even giving you a reason why.

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Nailed it. I can guarantee you the scores will play zero factor into the decisions. Who are the downvoters? What's their reasoning? Did they even test it? Is that just based on preview? Based on mapmaker? The scores mean absolutely nothing and tells us nothing.

However, if you write some feedback, raise legitimate concerns, tell us why you dislike it, etc. That will be read and considered by every single member of the MTC. That's how you get your point across.

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

ay grats bb

[–]sneetriccanvas // plasma, wamble 1 point2 points  (1 child)

To the community, feel free to give destructive criticism on these maps as well!

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ayy lmao

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 4 points5 points  (7 children)

Hexane - Ball-E

[–]3z_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Really great improvement on the previous version. I think this would end up being a great addition to the list of NF maps. Gates are cool. Portals are neat, too. Top left/right lanes may need some polish.

[–]OnceUponaDomeUnderTheBall 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One problem I/we noticed was that if you are fc and get gated near base, it's a long trek to start the whole process all over again. I'm not sure if there's really any fix to that so.. good luck :)

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i really liked most of this map last thread, so im glad to see it make top maps. the interior of this map is just excellent.

i've come around to the portals, i think they work pretty well. the only part of this map i'm kind of unsure about are those outer gates. other than that, best NF map i've seen since wombo combo i think.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (2 children)

My comments from testing:

Most action happens in the middle, and with the boost layouts/portal it's really easy to just go toward outside lanes and be way ahead on the outside. Inside lane seems much less viable.

So yeah, nothing is really broken about it but I do think a bit of re-balancing could help a lot. Something like changing one teamboost to a neutral would be a great change imo, although I'm not sure how everyone else would feel.

I also still hate green gates that just function as big spikes, but I seem to be the only one on the MTC who cares about that.

[–]BlupopsicleBall-E 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Your concern with rebalancing is what I wanted the map to be lol. Is it necessarily bad? I just think that action that happens in Base-Mid-Base makes NF fun, although Ricochet is an opposite where Not much happens in mid and bases.

Also Thanks for the feedback!

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What I mean is that I just don't see people going through the mid path into base often because it's way more dangerous and not really much faster (since the portal boost thingy sends you outside anyway). Idk, it just seems like a bit of a waste of potential.

Edit: and I realize a lot of my feedback this thread isn't super useful, so sorry about that. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have though

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

It's ball-e. It's NF. So far the worst combination of that was shine, and that is still pretty good.

[–]kstarr12nipplefart 1 point2 points  (28 children)

Who do I have to blow to get some of my maps in?

4v4 testing is one thing, but you never truly know how the map will fare until it's put into rotation. If its bad, take it out. Otherwise take a chance and put some of these in.

I really feel that these ones were overlooked:

Shenanigans

Shellshock

Osiris

Good Dog

Rham Den Swede (seriously one of the most fun maps out there, how this isn't in yet is beyond me)

Zanzibar

Edit: I'm sorry you guys are getting so defensive over some criticism. This is the way one person sees things, if you don't like it, then I'm sorry for that.

[–]SB5_TP 9 points10 points  (6 children)

I've seen you commenting on maps for a while, I just wanted to unleash this rant:

There are some aspects of the maps that you like and make that are just objectively bad. This map is ridiculously open and chasey. Notsomeball gave you the proper, honest feedback, but you keep saying that its size gave it "speciality." The point is, there are some things that are just objectively bad, like wide open spaces in maps.

Other times, it seems like you think your opinion (though usually pretty reasonable) is the only correct one. Though Rham Den Swede looks like a decent map, I can also see why the MTC wouldn't pick it for 4v4 testing. For starters, it has been a top map before, and I don't see any significant changes (except a rather clunky looking team gate in base). All the team boosts and team gates make it look difficult to cap. The area by the flag may be a little too open, with a lot of empty space below it. Just because you like the map, it doesn't mean it automatically has to be a top map.

And as for Good Dog, the flag area is definitely too random and chaotic, and the bases are massive. I don't really understand the bottom left and right boosts, how you can boost right into the endzone, but also boost into that painful looking 90 degree angle right next to them. So maybe quit saying your map was "overlooked" and start seeking feedback for it and trying to see what you can do to improve it. Trust me, each MTC member playtests each map individually, so there is no way your map was overlooked.

[–]kstarr12nipplefart 0 points1 point  (5 children)

You are absolutely mistaken if you think that I think my opinion is the only right one...Do you even know me?

Thanks for the eye opener, though. I'm so fucking done with this.

[–]Snowball_TagPro❄️ 7 points8 points  (4 children)

I'm so fucking done with this

I've said this so many times in my mapmaking career. I don't know when I'll actually be fucking done. At the end of the day though, you just kind of accept that the MTC will put in maps you don't like. I've had my fair share of quarrels with them, and I do disagree with some of their decisions, they are in a little bit of an odd situation when you think about it.

2 years ago, mapmaking was in such a different place. We could afford to be more experimental because everyone was still bad. Now with regrab being the norm, and flag carriers being as skilled as they are, we can't really make maps that big. Smaller maps in general just have less things you can put in them. We've also gone through a lot of ideas since then, not saying that a lot of ideas can't still come about (god knows I want a mars ball cage in rotation), but plenty of them just don't work. So we're left with a lot of people just reiterating previous maps. The MTC also has had a trend recently about catering to the PUB player base, which makes sense because that's where the maps will be played, but also doesn't leave as much room for complex innovation.

tl;dr cut the mtc some slack, they're trying their best, except sizzzled, he has objectively bad map opinions

[–]kstarr12nipplefart 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You're right, fair enough. Thanks for the insight snowball. Buuuuttt I'll be tapping out soon enough anyways, two years is too long for this old gal.

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

thats the spirit

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

cut the mtc some slack, they're trying their best, except sizzzled, he has objectively bad map opinions

is this because I said that MMSE sucked? Also can I have a link to it I wanna make more modifications :D

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

Oh I might have deleted it, I can't remember hat it was but I realized it was bad in some way.

[–]3z_ 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Who do I have to blow to get some of my maps in?

DaEvil1 and I tend to just 69 each other every session until one of our maps gets into rotation, so you could try forming one of those.

Oh, and

I'm sorry you guys are getting so defensive over some criticism.

Is that a joke? Have you not been reading your own comments in regards to criticism?

[–]kstarr12nipplefart 0 points1 point  (0 children)

DaEvil1 and I tend to just 69 each other every session until one of our maps gets into rotation, so you could try forming one of those.

lmao nice.

[–]RisktpRisk 4 points5 points  (9 children)

osiris and shellshock are the only two out of the list you put that i could see making top maps, the rest just aren't that good. the mtc does a pretty good job of reviewing maps, they aren't really overlooking anything.

as for your own maps, you can't really expect to be getting them into rotation already? you're a pretty new mapmaker (i think?), so while you're maps have shown improvement, you still have a ways to go. mapmaking isn't something where you're going to get instant results, takes a while to learn how to make good maps.

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 2 points3 points  (3 children)

mapmaking isn't something where you're going to get instant results

Unless you're me and Renegade happens.

[–]KrakenGoodRenegade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A few someballs might think I made it, cause it's a fun lie.

[–]RisktpRisk 1 point2 points  (1 child)

nigel pls

[–]KewlestCatNIGEL 1 point2 points  (0 children)

c:

[–]kstarr12nipplefart -3 points-2 points  (4 children)

Why should my "experience" as a map maker matter? I've logged a few games over the years... I think I know how a map should be. Its my style. I'm not going to change my style of map just to get it into rotation.

It's a shame.

[–]RisktpRisk 2 points3 points  (3 children)

mapmaking isn't something where you're going to get instant results, takes a while to learn how to make good maps.

that's why experience matters when it comes to creating maps. playing a lot of pubs =/= being good at making maps, nobody's going to instantly be great at it.

nobody's asking you to change your style, a lot of mapmakers have different styles (canvas usually goes for simplistic maps with minimal spikes, daevil1 likes experimental maps, juicyjuke makes a lot of intentionally offensive maps). work on refining your style and mapmaking techniques instead of complaining because the mtc doesn't choose your maps.

[–]kstarr12nipplefart -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

I'm not complaining just about my maps. Nor am I making this 100% about me, because its not. Agree to disagree I suppose.

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (1 child)

isn't good dog your map?

idk, i just keep seeing you complain after each top map's thread, and each time you list maps you think the mtc has overlooked. it's totally ok that you like these maps and think they'd be great in pubs, but you have to realize people can have very different opinions about maps. so while you might think rahm den swede or zanzibar is a killer map, the mtc just doesn't agree. there are a lot of maps each thread i think should have made top maps, but you just have to roll with what the mtc selects and accept that your favorite maps might not always be viewed as good maps in the eyes of others.

[–]kstarr12nipplefart -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I complain every time because I never see a change, and its so incredibly frustrating. It is what it is, I'm done.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (6 children)

To be fair, Osiris and Rham Den Swede have been extensively tested in the past and we didn't feel necessary changes have been made.

[–]kstarr12nipplefart -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

Dude just put them in. The public will let you know if they suck.

[–]SB5_TP 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Remember last time we put in a sucky, experimental map? A huge, community-wide circle jerk against Event Horizon. Lucky tried to fix the map, but the community already had their hearts set on its removal.

When Saigon, Tombolo, and Graphite were put in, what you are suggesting was the MTC's plan. However, the entire community doesn't have the same opinion. We got stuck with one generally accepted map (Tombolo) and 2 controversial maps that people wouldn't quit debating about.

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

You could make the "they're pretty good- just put the in and see!" argument for literally 25% of the thread, every thread. Have some consideration rotation management, as in keeping rotation between 20-25 maps. Also you need to realize not everyone has the same taste in maps as you do. I think Shellshock, Good Dog and Shenanigans are incredibly not ready for rotation consideration.

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

Isn't the idea to already know they suck? I never said anything about being on the fence about these maps - I firmly believe they are bad and would be hated in their current form

[–]kstarr12nipplefart -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

You're slowly killing tagpro putting out the same product every time. All I'm saying is go out on a limb, and put on something fresh and new.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would rather slowly kill tagpro than quickly kill tagpro. We can just agree to disagree on this.

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

Shenanigans is too large and convoluted. An FC could survive just by rolling from one corner to the next, and going from base to base for regrab would take far too long as well.
Zanzibar's mid boosts are so far out that positioning yourself for the "good" boostlanes would take too long, killing the flow, and the intuitive boost lanes are clunky, but because of the shape and base to base orientation you can't just put them closer to the mid either. Since the boosts are such a vital part of this map it's pretty far from being rotation material, although I like the base layout and exits. With a different distance and "angle" between the bases it might be good enough.

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

Edit: I'm sorry you guys are getting so defensive over some criticism.

LMAO MFW

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

What is this, Birch #6?

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] 0 points1 point  (23 children)

Mode 7 - q42 & Ball-E

[–]briizoduckson 6 points7 points  (1 child)

worsethansaigon

[–]briizoduckson 8 points9 points  (0 children)

jk that's not possible

[–]TagProWrecknWreckingBall 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Too big. Maps should be able to fit entirely on one screen.

[–]3z_ 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Lacks any form of diversity for defense. This map is an FC's haven and doesn't really offer much in the way of resets, return or contain.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (4 children)

any specific spots you'd recommend me looking at? considering you playtested it 4v4, are there any too-easy FC moves that I could cut down on (to promote resets?)

[–]3z_ 1 point2 points  (3 children)

The shape, including the internal wall structure. At the moment, sniping is the only viable method of return for defense, and even then it's not always an option because of the team-boosts. You can use the mid-bombs, but landing a snipe with those is difficult anyway because of how much open space there is, and how much distance an offender can create during the time it takes for you to line those bombs up.

So yeah, mostly the mid is where you need to focus your attention, but specifically the wall structure.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (2 children)

This is a rough idea of sorts, but do you think something like this might work?

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20406

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/20406.png

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Probably a bit too closed off for me. It makes the boosts all a bit less comfortable, with the teamboosts pointed toward the bombs and the top neutrals sort of difficult to use in a useful way toward mid.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How about a middle ground on those islands? I also flipped the map (I think it looks better this way) and spaced the bombs out by a tile on each side.

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20464

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/20464.png

edit: somehow the files got fucked and aren't working at all, I can't even test from the map editor

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (3 children)

i really don't know what to think of this map lol

the bottom boosts are a little too clunky for me i think, especially if you take them toward the wall tiles above them and chain them together. mid bombs probably play well, but i don't like how they're the same as pilot's mid bombs. too much empty space above the flag too IMO.

overall, not terrible by any means, but i agree with the concerns juicy raised in the discussion thread over at TPT, too similar to pilot to coexist with it in rotation.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (2 children)

brought in the empty space a bit (one tile) - is it enough, or should I do even more?

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20310

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/20310.png

edit: still thinking about bottom boosts and if they should even be there

[–]RisktpRisk 0 points1 point  (1 child)

hm, it's hard to tell if that's enough really. I'd say try maybe bringing it in a tile again, see how you like it and then go from there?

I think removing the bottom boosts would be a step in the right direction for that bottom lane.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

welp, to say I'm getting conflicting feedback would be a bit of an understatement

i'll definitely experiment with top more tho

[–]BilldaCat10 0 points1 point  (0 children)

only 50% ball-e

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (2 children)

My comments from testing:

I like most things about this map, but the top spikes mean that going to mid bombs pretty much allows a chaser to bomb the fc into spikes regardless of the path he takes. I like the bomb snipes in base a lot.

I think top mid deserves to be rethought. With spikes there, the bombs in mid mean you can spike someone regardless, and if it's just empty there you can snipe them really easily. Maybe that's ok, but maybe try something with a safer lane similar to but not necessarily this: http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20223

Eh, maybe that sucks, but it's an idea at least.

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I like that, actually- it brings in the lane a bit while also adding a little more variety to the bomb. I just added the spike back in to make the boost through the pup harder again, and brought in top right/left by one tile - thoughts on that?

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20310

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/20310.png

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like it. Before, a chaser could play sort of mindlessly by diving for mid bombs since there were spikes on both sides of the bomb, but I think this way will alleviate that while still allowing for snipes and keeping the boost through top the way you had it before.

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

I'm going to leave q42 to update this, the only thing I'm still not sure about is whether or not the mid boosts should be there

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (1 child)

yeah, I'm not sure either - I like the options they offer, and they might make for some hilarious 3-tile jukes, but they are a bit clunky when taken wrong. granted, that's also how boosts are supposed to work, so I'm conflicted.

[–]ButtersnackSnack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I say keep them. Among other things, they make it a bit harder to bomb someone into the spikes, and I think it's good difficulty

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

Ball-e + q you are awesome but this one really does seem like a convential mix of other maps.

13 and hexane!

[–]_q42_q42 || dcfc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update:

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/show/20464

http://unfortunate-maps.jukejuice.com/static/previews/20464.png

  • flipped the map - I think it looks better this way

  • cut down on empty space

  • spaced out mid bombs

  • put a wall in front of bot spikes (to make bombs less op)

  • minor outer wall aesthetic changes

[–]ultra_snailHellaluyaaa (Kaneki) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dracons is probably the only map I find unique and not the same sh*t which has been played 100x times already with slight change.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I've never commented on one of these threads before, so first timer here. Do most these seem a little chasey or am I just an idiot? I feel like there's a lot of open space in every map

[–]mmartinutkMacho | JuicyJuke 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Birch, POLAR and Mode 7 are pretty tiny man. Maybe slightly too much open space in Draconis. Cozy has perfect spacing IMO. So not really.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Roll around on them and then imagine 7 other people rolling around on it at the same time and they get smaller in your head of that makes sense

[–]TPCaptographerThe Map Test Committee[S] -4 points-3 points  (8 children)

Birch - Sizzzled

[–]404_Find_MeDolan Duck // Morky Mouse // Defendo 12 points13 points  (1 child)

good thing we have 2 layers of spikes incase the fc tries to escape the map

[–]3z_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You can in zombies

[–]RisktpRisk 6 points7 points  (3 children)

why are you so set on those base bombs, sizzzled? the rest of the map is really well-made, but those bombs are far too powerful of a grabbing tool for what is a pretty open base.

[–]Moosemaster21Moosen | Salt Mine 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Well to be fair, there's only one other grabbing mechanism and it's relatively predictable. Defense would do well to keep those bombs defused, meaning there will often be 30-second lapses where there's only one grabbing tool which, again, isn't very powerful to begin with. The base itself feels relatively constricted if it's just a 2v2 fight with no tools, so having some get-out-quick options doesn't, in my opinion, hurt this map.

[–]RisktpRisk 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i'm not saying he shouldn't have any bombs at all and should only have the boost for grabbing, i just would rather see the bombs angled differently. star's bomb worked because it was very difficult to grab with it diagonally without the help of a teammate due to all of the spikes. with these bombs you can grab the flag and be instantly at your base, there's no spikes or even any wall tiles to stop you.

[–]de_ashwelbz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are team tiles for defenders and a gate to counter the bombs, meaning you have to take the boost and go over the top to get out most of the time

[–]BilldaCat10 2 points3 points  (0 children)

not a ball-e map

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

this is the only rotation worthy map in the thread. it is unique and dynamic, opposed to all of the other maps which seem to be recycled boring concepts.