Okay, after today's games I decided that 150 tickets is too much, but 125 sounds like a good idea. Also new bulletpoints, but no real feedback requests - of course, speak up if you have an opinion: - Rework beds at main barracks - people get clumped up too much - Restrict all building in spawns and garages - so that people don't get dicked over and spawned in ammo boxes etc. - Lower siren volume - there have been complaints it's too loud - Grass sprites - pretty reasons and cover reasons
1) This sounds like a good idea. 8) This is a good idea as well. 3) I think it's fine the way it is. It's simple, clean and guaranteed to be one-way. 4) Stick a lvl ~2 ML inside the garage building so it can fire down that long hallway. 7) Is the forward bunker at the south end of the front of BE's base? 9) Meh, that feels like one of the last things that you determine. Yeah, those beds were confused. Perhaps stick them up against the wall and spawn people in the middle of the room kinda like BE rax.
3) I'll do the NF nerfs two-fold. First, I'll add the turrets and dragon's teeth. If it still appears NF-sided (Which after today's games I doubt) I'll rework the exits. 4) It'll be a couple of lvl2 MLs and the odd MG inside the base. 7)Forward bunker is the bunker with the flag - it's the northern bunker at the front of the base. 10) Beds will get shoved to the walls to allow a bigger spot for spawns.
Right my feedback. (I haven't read the thread so some of it will be duplicated I'm sure) 1. NF should start with a trickle income so that they can still get vehicles even if they are getting destroyed. 2. Make a nobuild in areas near the gate, otherwise people just wall it. 3. Id suggest that you have too many turrets outside to begin with, this just seems to slow the game down. I think itd be better to remove the turrets from outside and add some to the inside of the base. 4. Hard to drive APC's in the base (maybe just me), corners are very tight. Would also help if the walkways that you drive under were less opaque. 5. The walls that NF can build at the side of the map are confusing, as discussed they could do with being changed to something else. 6. Hard to spot the NF vehicle factory, could you maybe lighten up the inside of the cave so that players know where it is. 7. These changes all seem to help NF. It may be necessary to move a BE spawn forward or give them quicker access to the front lines. 8. Restrict as many useless weapons as you can (e.g. rail guns). 9. I wouldnt do this until after the next version, but we did discuss on steam about adding a second infantry path for NF. I wouldnt do it now because the other things will move the game in NF's favour. 10. To stop the garage area being captured quickly, incrementing the time it takes to capture each successive garage would be good (especially after the first since they have a spawn right at BE's base) e.g. 3s to cap, 7s to cap, 12s to cap (play with the numbers obviously). Edit: 11. May be worth moving the button for the gate slightly to allow BE to close it a bit easier as soon as it gets opened, maybe even to the other side of the gate itself. Thoughts? Edit 2: This is a bit unclear, I meant the other side of the gate but still on the BE side. I.e. when looking out of base the current button is to the left side of the gate, i was suggesting maybe moving that to the right. I dont think itd make a huge difference but might sway things in BE's favour a little if they are outmatched
@Wealthysoup: 1) Will add, see new changes 2) It's a double-edged sword. If there are no walls allowed there, NF will get decimated by HMGs in the trees. The solution would be a secondary path, or reducing the amount of turrets that slow down NF in the initial phase - again, refer to the changelist 3) There will be a few less MG turrets outside, and some turrets inside 4) It's intentional, to slow down the RushPCs that some people (Extrems) are very good with. It gives BE more chances to ambush the vehicles, and requires NF to get more ground control before a vehicle can get pushed through 5) Will change it's been discussed here - those will be brushes 6) I'll add a light in there. Great point. 7) We'll see how it works out once the changes take effect. I like the current position of the forward spawn, it's really not that far out from the battlements - depending on the current frontline, you can get back in in 15-20 seconds from death. 8) Restricted already. I can't get rid of DU because it'd also get rid of 50. Cal.. Rail Guns can't be equipped anyways, but I guess I'll remove them too 9) Yeah it'll come in if NF still gets pinned down too badly. 10) I'm not sure if it's possible to change that easily with the available entities, but it's an interesting idea. If Dz could perhaps shed some light on this it'd be sweet. I will also add dragon's teeth blocking RushPCs, so this might not be so necessary. 11) Mayyyybe, I don't know. Can other people comment on this? ==================================== Now on to the new additions to my changelist: I) NF start res -> 400? -- To allow a proper early vehicle for the initial push. A decent APC or a semi-proper medium. Include wages to get something good without much effort. II) Forward bunker res rate up to 10/s? -- I dunno, I'll add the resource trickle for NF main first and leave this as a "in case it's not enough" thing. Can other people comment on this? III) Forward gate longer reset time? -- So that it can stay open a little longer. Can other people comment on this? IV) Check engie restrict brush in base -- Some asshole was dropping MG turrets inside the restricted zone. Gotta check. V) Lower brushes under final flag -- We had Candles get squad-revived under the brush and basically outside the map. Oopsie. VI) Less turrets at start - NF doesn't have to be slowed so much for BE to get in position. I'll remove at least 2 MG turrets. VII) Restrict walls in front of main gate -- Sure, only Creeper does it, but Jesus Christ that was at least 6 wall segments stacked up over there. It'll only affect the road part, so wall-climbing will still be possible. VIII) Secondary path for infantry from VF? -- For NF to avoid the cluserfuck if they don't secure enough ground before BE hits them. It'd be step two, if reducing the turret amount proves to be not enough. IX) Lower B2 buildables area and disable wall building there -- So that NF has to use the buildable brushes to get to the trees, and so that the path can't be shielded from mortar fire. X) Add light to VF -- It's pitch black in there, so there's pretty much no reason not to do that. XI) Res trickle for NF main -- 2/s or 3/s, just so that the vehicles can be rolled out sooner than during the tests (after 20 minutes) That's it. Feel free to comment on any of those, particularly the orange boldened ones. Your feedback now makes for a better nuclear later
I think those are pretty reasonable changes. I don't think NF needs more ways into BE base. You just need to make it tougher for BE to gridlock NF. Removing wall capabilities on the gate road will help. You may want to try fitting one or two NF Lvl3MGs under the wall-ramp to cover that hallway. As long as they don't impede NF's movement, then there's no reason not to. You may want to also put some NF cameras up in the woods in front of the base. It gets very difficult to identify threats through those trees. If you're feeling crazy, you could try an NF radar on the cliff behind the camp.
Those NF MGs wouldn't quite fit rationally, instead I'd like to see how removing some turrets makes NF's initial push faster and thus harder to impede by BE. Building radars only detect vehicles and other buildings, and the camera entity mappers can use in hammer is broken and makes the cameras start with 100% HP but requiring a single impulse to be built and functional. You have to depend on engineer buildables.
Just identifying the turrets would be a huge plus. Those trees are ruthless. And it would be a nice target for BE grens at the beginning of the round.
OK only one issue from BE perspective. Once NF gets one vehicle in the garage - they have a spawn point that BE can not take away. So why also give them an additional flag that they can take. It seems the NF stategy is to overwhelm the flag, then keep spawning there while pushing APC's. This also splits BE's defense and makes it somewhat easier for NF to get an APC into the garage, after which the flag spawn doesn't matter. BE beat us (when I played once on NF) one game by building walls outside their base and defending the top of the walls to keep us from getting to the spawn point. We had a couple nubs and 7 vs 7 enables them to defend three locations - far left, far right, and one guy to keep building walls. The fact that most of the players stayed Engie the whole game was proof we didn't have the more experience team. The BE riflemen chewed us up. Also our nubs dropped walls in a crappy left hand wall stairs that made it very difficult to climb. They seemed to think rapid placement was more important that proper alignment to make quick climbing easy. Twice they would put huge gaps between the stairs and put them at odd angles. This in fact helped BE defend the left area with two guys and a revive engineer. Our nubs just kept building turrets in shit locations and attacks were not well coordinated. Obviously we played against a superior team - they dominated us. I find it funny that five guys standing in one area don't bother to look up and shoot the enemy firing down on us. They were to busy reviving and not shooting at all. Once the one rifleman died - all five guys died. Great map - I enjoyed the games even though I don't think I was on a winning game for the two match's I played. I don't think our loss is all that important and that it means the maps needs a change. I wouldn't mind a long alley around the back of the map, that could be easily defended by BE, but a third way in for NF. Maybe a scout can sneak back there to get in the base and cause some distraction. Just an idea.
First one I don't think it is necessary to increase res flow, especially if you add a small trickle from the start. Apcs are so cheap that with the combination of wages it never really feels like nf needs the money. I mean it might seem like a problem if it takes nf like 20 minutes to get the first bunker, like it did today, but by that point most of the team should have enough wages to pump out at least 2 apcs each. I do like the idea of a trickle from the start though, just so nf can occasionally afford a medium to help them push. That second part about the gate, I see no problem with it currently. It stays open long enough that an apc can get through if it standing near the gate. I am not sure by what wealthy meant by moving the switch though, like on the right side of it? Or the opposite side near where the door to the forward bunker flag is? In either case I don't think it is hard for be to get the button. I do like the idea of the garages taking longer as you cap them. I do want to point out that that foward bunker flag is also nfs main source of res, actually its only source of res in the current version. I kinda agree, but at the same time if be has a few decent rifleman or a couple of grens apcs aren't that much of problem to defend against. The nice thing about that situation is that is all really close combat, so rifleman are rather ridiculously useful on that map. I know we didn't quite get to the last point this time, but it seems to me that the capping that last point is one of the hardest things for nf to do. So from a balance perspective it shouldn't take nf too long to cap the garages. Also I am reminded of something, do you think you could add some sort of boon for be if they cap the camp flag? I know you said you couldn't affect nf's res, but I don't think putting a ticket drain on nf is a good idea either. Oh, you said you were gonna give nf a trickle flow of res, why not put it on that camp flag. The reason I ask for this is because once nf has an apc in the garage there is no reason for be to attempt to cap that camp flag. Even early game it doesn't really hinder nf too much, at least that is what I feel.
Could you comment on my number 10, as to whether its possible or not. I'm not sure about setting the starting res as high as 400 for NF since youll be adding the trickle. I'd be tempted to tweak the starting res after the resource trickle is tested. Balancing tends to go one of 2 ways, either way too much or not enough so I think its important to try to balance what you do. As it stands it already seems like a lot of the changes will help NF.
It's possible. You could do it by having a emp_cap_point (flag brush) for each of the different capture times with point_templates that spawn them. So when you want to increase the capture time, you simply: flag01* Kill template_flag01_time_3 forcespawn Should be quite easily done with a couple of logic_cases. The only problem would be the entlimit, I think it's 1024 or something and that it doesn't decrease(?) when removing brushes, etc. But I may be wrong, even tho it shouldn't really matter for the flags.
@Spartacus: There will be less turrets. The second pair will be removed, which should ease the approach for NF. Any turrets BE engineers set up will have to be dealt with in some other way as they really shouldn't even go up, given the circumstances. @JGF: I'll add dragon's teeth/blockades for the garages that get lowered when the flag gets captured - they'll block the way in for quick rushes, and if that's still too hard on BE, I'll rework the exit from the garages to be pretty much equal to the forward bunker spawn for NF. I don't think NF needs a third way in. The way it is, if the defence is broken it's like the breaking of floodgates - BE has to work overtime to stabilise the frontline again, and walls are supposed to make it harder to capture. @Lazybum: II) Okay, I'll start with the trickle and if it's still not enough, the buff to forward bunker will come in the next version. III) Wealthy meant moving it to the right side. I'm not convinced to be honest, if a defender realises that maybe the gate should be closed he will sprint over the open field and unless an APC rolls him over, he'll get to the button and shut the gate. For NF, the distances don't really matter that much as the rush distance from the northand south of the map are pretty much identical. Also, you raise a valid point. The easiest way of capturing BE's final flag is draining all of BE's tickets. The previous two major hurdles should take about 20 minutes in an ideal situation, so that there is still time to scramble around that last flag. @Wealthysoup: Good point. I'll only add in the trickle, starting resources will remain the same. @Dz: You also told me it had a slight chance of increasing the crash rate :p So, to reiterate, there is one big discussion point for now: How to implement the trickle. One way would be to add it all to the flag at the VF, the other to add it all to the abandoned camp flag, and finally a split between the two. The first option means a constant, steady income no matter what happens. The second option gives BE a chance to stifle that income. If NF secure the flag - income. If it becomes neutral - no income. This might still leave the problem of not enough resources, but again, if you don't have control of the camp flag, vehicles won't help you all that much since the forest is sticky heaven anyways. The third option is a compromise between the two - you get a little money all the time, but you get more if you have a little more ground. Thoughts on this please - which do you guys think is the fairest? Personally, I think option #2 is the best one.
If you think it's necessary, then I think it would be fine if the abandoned camp flag gave 1 res/s. If you make it too easy, then you remove the incentive for NF to capture the barracks flag. Once the first garage gets captured, the barracks stops mattering.
Option 2 for sure, more incentive for be to push into the forest, instead of just camping on top of the forward bunker. That one round we had that was a full 20 player match showed that be doesn't have to actually move from that spot. I admit be had good players on their team, but fighting an uphill battle is always hard for the attacking force. If a couple of be guys try for the camp flag it will break up their defense, giving nf a chance to push. The flip side is that it is a forwards spawn for nf, so it would suck if they lost it. In short, it creates another small battle ground or contested area for the map, which is a good thing in my opinion.
I actually think its a good idea splitting the income and giving an additional incentive to fight over the forest cap point (didnt consider that before), but I would say option 3 is the best. I think its important that if NF is really awful that they can still atleast get APC's to use as a semi forward spawn to help them cap the forest camp. That said it probably depends on how much res income you are planning on giving them. I'd imagine 1/s for each or possibly 1/s for the base and 2/s for the forest camp, although that might be too much. Either way would be better than it is at the moment though. I have a feeling that the time needed to capture the last point will need lowered (or another change made, i.e. closer spawn for NF) but its hard to say without it actually happening in testing (the route for BE to get to the room is significantly shorter than it is for NF)
Given the scope of all the other changes, I'm now leaning towards putting 2/s on the abandoned camp. It'll be easier for NF to get to with less turrets in the way and will be more interactive for both sides (cappable), and Hearthstone taught me that interactivity is good :p It also means an APC roughly every 2,5 minutes given the wages, so just a mere 10 APCs before it's essentially too late for NF. It shouldn't be too OP. At least it isn't in my head. And if NF is still just held up inthat canyon, this wouldn't help because of walls blocking so much. It'd require another, longer path instead.
I'm home, I have the .vmf, I have Hammer, I have the changelist. Get hyped. And ready for testing this in the next week.
