Spotlight on crossroads The second spotlight is now about crossroads. As I am optimizing all maps that don't have a mapper active on it, I am wondering what you think should be added to improve crossroads. Please rant about what you love or hate about this map, but KEEP CURSEWORDS TO A MINIMUM. In case anybody wants it, here is the minimap: (click for larger version)
Middle: No forward barracks placement (via minor obstructions). One refinery, normal resources. Better access to structures/cover for infantry. No bridge flaps to catch the NF CV with. Less trees (they provide turret cover). Bases: NF: Access to upper walls, and turret placement. Idea: Tunnels in each base, for infantry to travel while under siege.
No forward barracks placement (via minor obstructions). I like this idea One refinery, normal resources. Leave the refineries where they are Better access to structures/cover for infantry. Dont' know how this would be done, but i seem to like this idea as well No bridge flaps to catch the NF CV with. YES, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD YES Less trees (they provide turret cover). I think MORE trees would be better Bases: NF: Access to upper walls, and turret placement.I agree with this Idea: Tunnels in each base, for infantry to travel while under siege.Also maybe tunnels to the center, or something to go up and over, pathway maybe not a ladder but passageway
I'm trying to think how this map could be improved. Removing the vech ramps, added an extra infantry side path for each team, and allow infantry to run around in middle more. The extra infantry route would be a different idea than a tunnel since a tunnel would remove a bit of the feel of the map and would kinda suck. It would force the game to be a very infantry heavy with less love on BOMB THE BARRACKS LOLOLO. Only massive problem I have is once a team has the middle they win... almost worth lowering base defenses if they have middle to stop stalemates.
Make it so its easier take back middle. Seems like once its took its pretty much GG. Maybe some under ground tunnels? Or if there was flags you could cap for middle spawns instead of barracks blocking all tanks paths. The flag cap spawn could be in those middle buildings under the very top camper spot. You know what I mean? So it would be an epic battle in the middle with out needing a good commander to drop rax on both sides. edit: like this. The dots are where the flags are and spawns.
There shouldn't be any tunnels in the middle... If only because they work both ways. Controlling middle should all be about aboveground combat. Mind the emphasis on combat, not building turrets and entrenching yourself in an unassailable fortress. The reason you win if you get middle is because middle is so difficult to take. There's only two entrances that are easy to control, there's no open terrain that would let a tank rush past your defenses, and you have good positions from which to arty the enemy's base and defenses, while your own positions are tight, irregular, and thus difficult to return arty fire. Having a 5 resource advantage, that helps too. I meant to say that they provide cover for the turrets. Players can't see through the foliage, but turrets can. Trees are alright if the turrets are on the same level of the player and the leaves aren't in the way, but obscured turrets can hold off an entire team on the last flag in Escort, and they don't help in Crossroads much.
Crossroads is one of my favourite maps, the main things I'd change would be as mentioned, don't rely on raxes. They add to much instability to start with. You might consider opening up the cliffs, expand the buildings north and south of the centre back into the cliffs and add another door which exits into the area before the base, so you could more or less walk from one end to the other in a straight line. This should allow players who have lost the centre to push back without having to use the rather exposed routes on either side. The middle may benefit from predefined spawn points rather than raxes, you do need some sort of spawn in there but they don't need to be easily destructable. I'd suggest a few flags, maybe four, one to each side and one under each cliff, or two, just under the cliffs, or three, cliffs and centre, but try to make it so that you can't easily control the entire centre and push the enemy out all the way, so the three flag option would be something to be careful with. Also consider adding in a bit more cover in the central buildings, more boxes on the roof, more crouch cover on the bridges to let infantry move around the middle more easily.
I think relying on APC spawning and barracks close to the middle area is the best way to deal with the spawning in middle. Making barracks are meh. Same thing with flags as they only end up being a flag camp map and that gets boring. Also to Chris, what do you mean by, "You might consider opening up the cliffs, expand the buildings north and south of the centre back into the cliffs and add another door which exits into the area before the base, so you could more or less walk from one end to the other in a straight line." Please make what you mean on the minimap as I can interpret what you just said too many ways. The cover to the middle, that is correct. The middle buildings are supposed to be infantry combat but tanks can destory the area. The fact that the towers are too good for camping also makes the rest of the middle useless. What would be the best thing to do with the towers everyone likes to camp on?
uh, why exactly would you want people to run farther to get to the front line, that just sounds like a stupid and terrible idea. Let me give you some advise, people dont enjoy 'running' for over half the time they are playing the game, granted empires does involve some running but you shouldnt have to do it every-time-you-spawn. I mean really, does ANYONE enjoy running half way across the map?
I think the best thing would probably be to add a central piece to the roof, something you can shoot at and have the splash hurt the infantry on the tower, at the moment you can't splash them with cannons. I'd add barricades to the side of the bridges and the edges of the central buildings, that should make them a bit harder to murder from the ground. By 'expand the building' I mean take the rooms with the staircases under the towers, and extend them into the north and south cliffs, then put another door which leads into the starting area. Like this: Make some sort of room system under the cliff, similar to what is already in the middle, if you use rooms and not corridors they shouldn't become nadefests and they allow quick and covered access to the middle for infantry, so they don't have to charge through tanks at the gates. Once they're at the middle they can start fighting the tanks. If you put a flag in the yellow room and a spawn point in the two furthest red rooms for NF, and in the yellow room's counterpart in the north for BE, that would put the two pretty far apart at all times with some distance to go for their flags, that shouldn't be a camp fest.
i think removing fow raxes is a bad idea, but then again you can nobuild the middle so lvl3s wont be a problem, and it will be easier to recapture middle
i would make the map larger in width, (adding 1/2 of width to each entrance?) removing the option of barracks in the middle (obstructions?) and replace it by flags or something, possibly 1 on each end and 1 in the middle that bleeds? and definately add more infantry only pathways from one end to the other (trench walkpaths running trough the middle from nf to be side?) i like the map but hate how it ends half of the time (1 team trying to keep there last barracks in the center up while its shelled with siesmics)
Only real problem for infantry are turrets hidden behind trees so you cant aim at it. I never thought of infantry camping the towers as a problem cause it only takes one guy with a mortar to clear those towers. Its more of a problem that many players refuse to play gren and stare at the towers as rifleman and die...
no ones mentioned how brutal it can be to drive through the middle when your team has a rax up. for nf it's usually impossible to go down the west path because of the way buildings *have* to be placed. maybe removing some trees and maybe flattening the rax spots would help. chris' idea is actually pretty cool, and it would add an entirely new dynamic to the map. with that idea you can be winning pretty bad but still be vulnerable to an organized squad coming straight through the middle. the flags/spawns are also awesome, and mitigate the problem of "shit our rax is down, gg" Ive always said crossroads should be 30-40% BIGGER, in all ways. that would solve a lot of the problems by itself. but i know that;s not likely to happen.
It does need to get bigger, you know it is too small if ranged arty can hit your main from the middle.
I think the turrets in the middle are my main problem with this map. They shoot you from a very large distance, from on top of buildings, preventing everyone from advancing even one meter. Engineers build/repair them faster than grenadiers can destroy them. If that could be fixed i could simply ignore all other problems. imo they're only very minor in comparison.
I suggest alog with general turret limitatiions there should br a tunnel for vehiclas leading under ground from one base to the other with ladders to the surface in the middle. the exact arctecture and infantry cover is up to you to decide. But I belive a path where arty tanks dont own is necisary. You might even put doors on each end that can be closed enough to prevent vehical acces but not infantry.
well, basically widen the passages and add a trench cleaving them in 2 maybe coming together in the center obstruct barracks places and put some fun stuff in the cliffs on center as others said
